Site with over a million users and one of the biggest agitprop vehicles of the last five years and now it's private. Lol. Lmao.

Edit: Ok, now the mods are saying making the site private is only temporary while they "deal with the cleanup from ongoing brigading."

  • Link
    ·
    3 months ago

    deleted by creator

    • LeninsRage [he/him]
      ·
      3 years ago

      This is an extremely common Fox News tactic, they'll bring in an interviewee to intentionally embarrass as a stereotype (due to inexperience and/or lack of preparation) live on air to confirm every single one of the prejudices of their viewers. The anchors are certainly coached to goad and humiliate the interviewees as much as possible.

      • Chapo_Trap_Horse [none/use name]
        ·
        3 years ago

        Yeah but where did they get owned? The anchor just laughed and the mod just had honest answers that made sense.

        • Melon [she/her,they/them]
          ·
          3 years ago

          She fell for Fox's naked attempt to steer the interview direction away from actual motivations for having that community, and towards her dogwalking and personal motivations. She fell for talking about dogs more than the injustices felt by millions of people by participating in this unfair American labor system.

          Aside from that, she also didn't prepare physically for the interview. Unbrushed hair. Poor lighting. Not staying still. Low quality webcam. Not looking into the webcam. Not dressed up.

          She got "owned" because she didn't have any media training at all. She could have gotten some basic media training from a local DSA. Instead, she turned on her webcam and got on national television as if it was a school zoom meeting. She put in no effort in the situation, which has people rightfully feeling cheated out of proper representation.

          • Chapo_Trap_Horse [none/use name]
            ·
            3 years ago

            I mean are you saying their hair sucked? It was a normal webcam, the background was fine, they looked around while they were talking cause they were thinking, they gave answers that made sense and were matter of fact. Fox didn't even really do much manipulating, they just asked what they did for work. It was on subject.

            I get what you're saying but it just didn't seem that bad to me.

    • SgtHatred [he/him]
      ·
      3 years ago

      I kinda thought the interviewer felt bad for them and was intentionally trying to go easy on them. But yeah you could tell he was having a hard time keeping a straight face. Fox couldn't have imagined a better interviewee to lampoon.