cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/2185545
Archived version: https://archive.ph/9BZ0x
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20230901133206/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-66679910
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/2185545
Archived version: https://archive.ph/9BZ0x
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20230901133206/https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-66679910
A small internet community magically doing as you wish and ignoring him is roughly as effective in changing the outcome as a video game boycott.
spoiler
Both are ineffective.
I not talking about boycotts. I’m talking about giving him attention and publicity that he wouldn’t otherwise get. Like live streaming his trial, for example.
This little community, even with federated size, will not change the outcome whether or not we pay attention to this.
They’re talking about the trial, not us giving this news attention here.
They didn’t clarify that way or respond accordingly, so I really don’t know.
EDIT:
Fine, there it is. I do agree that it’s going to likely boost Trump’s re-election chances and that sucks.
They said they weren’t talking about boycotts - as in they are not shaming us for participating in the discussion of this.
They then say
As in that the live streaming of his trial is a bad thing.
They talked about the trial the whole time, you two just misunderstood each other, it’s what happens.
I see that now, and edited accordingly. My mistake.
No worries! I have a hard time reading tone, so if this seemed hostile on my end, just know it wasn’t the intention ♥️
I read you clearly at least. It made me read the other person’s text again and realize I was in error. ❣