USA Universities learn the consequences of disrespecting free speech

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Sat, Dec 03, 2016 at 06:10:18AM -0600, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
> On 12/03/2016 05:23 AM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 03, 2016 at 05:16:56AM -0600, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
> >> On 12/03/2016 04:50 AM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> >>>
> >>>   SKQ - reaming it with Javascript and pop-ups enabled
> >>>
> >>> Who woulda thought?
> >>>
> >>> At least we learn something today - for those who're a bit on the slow
> >>> side at least - web page pop-ups ACTUALLY still exist!!!
> >>
> >> My point is not that the pop-up is there. My point is how such a
> >> one-sided, deceptive message discredits everything on that site.
> > 
> > OK, so your first position that the pop-up had anything to do with what
> > you were saying, is now retracted by you.
> > 
> > I accept your retraction.
> 
> The manner in which it was said did play a role. A banner off to the
> side talking about the boycott (which I was aware of) would have been a
> bit more reasonable. Yes, I'm equally annoyed about it when progressive
> news sites do the same thing, but usually there's some justification to
> it (i.e. Nestlé and this urge of theirs to bottle up water, especially
> in places like Michigan not too far outside of Flint).
> 
> >> Especially when shoved in the reader's face like that.
> > 
> > Or not?
> > 
> > So a 'news website' is talking about a boycott of Kellogs.
> > 
> > And, in your illustrious opinion, this 'news' is "one-sided" and
> > "deceptive".
> 
> Breitbart is calling for the boycott themselves, just because Kellogg's
> pulled their ads. They are making it sound like Kellogg's is attacking
> the company, even though their PR guy clearly said the move is not
> political in nature.

Yet they got their PR guy to make a public announcement, letting the
world know that, officially, Kellogs is pulling off all their
advertisements from Breitbart, rather than just quietly pulling their
ads and making no big loud public announcement.


And somehow I'm supposed to believe that this very public pronouncement
of action, by Kellogs, is not the slightest bit political, has no
"political effect"?


Shawn, are you seriously expecting me to believe that?



> It's funny how both Rush Limbaugh and Breitbart seem to have problems
> keeping advertisers.

Early days Mr. Sean My-opinion-is-completely-unbiased Quin.

Early days.


By the way, the outcome, at least in the first two days, looks to be
right up there with Target's $10 billion income and cap loss, and
proportionally equivalent to Missouri U's $32 million dollar hit - but
that's right, you're just like, you know, way above facts, superior in
other ways too, far too superior to stoop to reading at Breitbart. Let's
see how the next two months plays out for Kellogs and their "non
political yet strangely very public" boycott of Breitbart ...

<snigger>