"Racism is discrimination on steroids, powered by privileges given to those in the culturally dominant race. In the United States, it’s a bias with a pickax. It’s a prejudice with the weight of 400 years of slavery, Jim Crow laws and history behind it. That’s a distinction that has sometimes been hard for white people, myself included, to discern."
This is poppycock. A system in which there is a "culturally dominant race" is, by definition "racist." In addition, if you are on the receiving end of "bias with a pickax" you probably think that the colour of your skin is somehow involved. People like Reeder (who he?) would be more gainfully employed combatting injustice rather than trying to parse names for that injustice in a verbal angels on a pinhead paragraph.
We have not cut the cord yet because my husband likes cable for the sports, yes, including Marquee for the Cubs. However, we did make some what of a Ricketts protest. We, and others in our group, gave up 5 season tickets to the Cubs which we have held since 1986.
I do like the ale carte cable approach. For us, it would include sports and TCM only!
I found it ironic that on the day you're polling about the pre-eminence of Chicago's two dailies (both of which are mere shells of their prior journalistic vigor) your item on the use of [sic] used an example where the Sun Times copy editor failed to note (unlike you, who caught it) that Ald. Austin incorrectly used the word "it's" in place of the correct "its". Would a properly staffed Sun-Time newsroom have missed that one?
I'm a Sun-Times devotee. But I find that when local news comes up in conversation, the Tribune is the standard reference for people. If the papers were facial tissues, the Trib is Kleenex, and Sun-Times is Puffs.
Walgreens---medications (for women only) are "indecent materials"? Whaaaa? Thank you DOJ for not set us up for going back 200 years...this time.
Marquee---we were happy to have it included when we changed platforms only to learn we are locked out because we live to close to Wrigley. Um...we live about 300 miles away.
UnFoxing-I went to share this on FB as it's a great great idea but was routed to "Media Matters America's" FB page and it was not there that I could find. I'm going to do it anyway..Zorn could you follow up to see how many actually do that. I'm skeptical that it would ever happen. Carlson is on a short list of people "I'm very close to hating"; it's a sad state of affairs that citizens cannot believe something is true when there's hard documentation...
Vallas-paranoid right wing clap trap indeed. Why would parents discipline children for learning facts?...oh yeah, that's the world we live in.
Thanks for not 'sicing' and the great tweets this week..loved the baby phones
No shopping at Walgreen’s because X; drop Disney because Y; wish for politically segregated cable packages; no more Tesla or Ben and Jerry’s because politics over products and quality. If you get enjoyment out of buying based on politics, I guess you are getting your money’s worth, but I leave that out of the decision and enjoy the product. My plenty progressive daughter loves Ben and Jerry’s and only wants Oberweis’ skim milk, and she gets such pleasure out of both. Smart kid!
I stopped going to Walgreens some time ago for customer service reasons. I've had bad luck with the ones near me -- people not nice, long lines, missed appointments, screw-ups with refills, etc. I tried CVS, which can boast carpet tiles and an admirable refusal to sell tobacco products. But the pharmacy was one of those arrogant pharmacies, where they're like, look, the white coat means, yeah, you're going to be standing around for a while before I acknowledge your presence, okay? I'm now exclusively an Osco person. The one I use is super nice and quick.
Yep, time to boycott Wallgreens. They chose to cave to conservative pressure to infringe on women's inalienable right to control their own life and that must not be tolerated. The fact is that Dobb's is unconstitutional and will be repealed or overruled by a future court as being so, such as Lawrence v Texas.
Article III provides no power to the SCOTUS to nullify rights as explained in the Federalist #84. Read both and you'll see. If someone doesn't, then they are a conservative and as conservatives do not believe in rights by definition, that would be expected. conservatives have no place on any court for that reason.
I think that Prof. Terry is correct about the effect of ala carte pricing. But while he may be thrilled by 'cutting them off at the knees' for Fox, he should acknowledge the same effect on MSNBC and CNN. FOX has 30% more viewers than MSNBC and twice as many as CNN. https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/here-are-the-cable-news-ratings-for-january-2023/523190/
If the number of people willing to pay for a service is a fraction of viewers, then the impact will be worse for the smaller players. As with newspapers, there are few people that are willing to pay what the product costs.
The idea of 'red' and 'blue' bundling is interesting but would increase the echo chamber aspect of media consumption and reduce the ability of interested viewers to sample or routinely consume alternative media.
In the end, this may be moot, as more media migrates to streaming platforms. An all-news and commentary streaming platform might be able to support a subscriber base but would probably have to include all of the largest products and not go 'red' and 'blue'.
Good luck boycotting Walgreen's if you have pricey prescriptions and are enrolled in an ACA or Medicare plan. You have the choice of paying out of pocket (no prob if you're a Rickets or Pritzker, but tough for most of us) or shopping during open enrollment for 2024 this fall for the best deal that doesn't involve Walgreen's, finally being able to switch when the new choice goes into effect in January. I'll pick up toothpaste and cough drops somewhere else for now, and will see what all of the pharmacies are doing about abortion pills on the fall, but if Walgreen's remains the only affordable source of a must-hav, pricey medication, that's where we'll commit to buy it in 2024.
Maybe Walgreens is just being careful. It wasn't very long ago that it paid something like $5.7 billion for dispensing opioids that were declared safe and legal by the FDA.
I have to disagree with you Eric on discontinuing the use of [sic] to indicate that the speaker or writer quoted used incorrect grammar. In many, but not all, cases I find the use of incorrect grammar diminishes the credibility of the speaker or writer for me on the subject matter. (But then again, grammar is probably racist. Why? Because everything is racist now, you can look it up! 😁)
I had a hard time with the "tweet poll." Several were very funny--a higher % than usual. Well collected!
"Racism is discrimination on steroids, powered by privileges given to those in the culturally dominant race. In the United States, it’s a bias with a pickax. It’s a prejudice with the weight of 400 years of slavery, Jim Crow laws and history behind it. That’s a distinction that has sometimes been hard for white people, myself included, to discern."
This is poppycock. A system in which there is a "culturally dominant race" is, by definition "racist." In addition, if you are on the receiving end of "bias with a pickax" you probably think that the colour of your skin is somehow involved. People like Reeder (who he?) would be more gainfully employed combatting injustice rather than trying to parse names for that injustice in a verbal angels on a pinhead paragraph.
I'm no zoologist, but aren't chimpanzees apes?
We have not cut the cord yet because my husband likes cable for the sports, yes, including Marquee for the Cubs. However, we did make some what of a Ricketts protest. We, and others in our group, gave up 5 season tickets to the Cubs which we have held since 1986.
I do like the ale carte cable approach. For us, it would include sports and TCM only!
I found it ironic that on the day you're polling about the pre-eminence of Chicago's two dailies (both of which are mere shells of their prior journalistic vigor) your item on the use of [sic] used an example where the Sun Times copy editor failed to note (unlike you, who caught it) that Ald. Austin incorrectly used the word "it's" in place of the correct "its". Would a properly staffed Sun-Time newsroom have missed that one?
I'm a Sun-Times devotee. But I find that when local news comes up in conversation, the Tribune is the standard reference for people. If the papers were facial tissues, the Trib is Kleenex, and Sun-Times is Puffs.
We should also boycott Walgreens for what they've done to the refrigerated section, swapping out the clear glass doors for annoying video screens.
Walgreens---medications (for women only) are "indecent materials"? Whaaaa? Thank you DOJ for not set us up for going back 200 years...this time.
Marquee---we were happy to have it included when we changed platforms only to learn we are locked out because we live to close to Wrigley. Um...we live about 300 miles away.
UnFoxing-I went to share this on FB as it's a great great idea but was routed to "Media Matters America's" FB page and it was not there that I could find. I'm going to do it anyway..Zorn could you follow up to see how many actually do that. I'm skeptical that it would ever happen. Carlson is on a short list of people "I'm very close to hating"; it's a sad state of affairs that citizens cannot believe something is true when there's hard documentation...
Vallas-paranoid right wing clap trap indeed. Why would parents discipline children for learning facts?...oh yeah, that's the world we live in.
Thanks for not 'sicing' and the great tweets this week..loved the baby phones
No shopping at Walgreen’s because X; drop Disney because Y; wish for politically segregated cable packages; no more Tesla or Ben and Jerry’s because politics over products and quality. If you get enjoyment out of buying based on politics, I guess you are getting your money’s worth, but I leave that out of the decision and enjoy the product. My plenty progressive daughter loves Ben and Jerry’s and only wants Oberweis’ skim milk, and she gets such pleasure out of both. Smart kid!
I stopped going to Walgreens some time ago for customer service reasons. I've had bad luck with the ones near me -- people not nice, long lines, missed appointments, screw-ups with refills, etc. I tried CVS, which can boast carpet tiles and an admirable refusal to sell tobacco products. But the pharmacy was one of those arrogant pharmacies, where they're like, look, the white coat means, yeah, you're going to be standing around for a while before I acknowledge your presence, okay? I'm now exclusively an Osco person. The one I use is super nice and quick.
Yep, time to boycott Wallgreens. They chose to cave to conservative pressure to infringe on women's inalienable right to control their own life and that must not be tolerated. The fact is that Dobb's is unconstitutional and will be repealed or overruled by a future court as being so, such as Lawrence v Texas.
Article III provides no power to the SCOTUS to nullify rights as explained in the Federalist #84. Read both and you'll see. If someone doesn't, then they are a conservative and as conservatives do not believe in rights by definition, that would be expected. conservatives have no place on any court for that reason.
I think that Prof. Terry is correct about the effect of ala carte pricing. But while he may be thrilled by 'cutting them off at the knees' for Fox, he should acknowledge the same effect on MSNBC and CNN. FOX has 30% more viewers than MSNBC and twice as many as CNN. https://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/here-are-the-cable-news-ratings-for-january-2023/523190/
If the number of people willing to pay for a service is a fraction of viewers, then the impact will be worse for the smaller players. As with newspapers, there are few people that are willing to pay what the product costs.
The idea of 'red' and 'blue' bundling is interesting but would increase the echo chamber aspect of media consumption and reduce the ability of interested viewers to sample or routinely consume alternative media.
In the end, this may be moot, as more media migrates to streaming platforms. An all-news and commentary streaming platform might be able to support a subscriber base but would probably have to include all of the largest products and not go 'red' and 'blue'.
Good luck boycotting Walgreen's if you have pricey prescriptions and are enrolled in an ACA or Medicare plan. You have the choice of paying out of pocket (no prob if you're a Rickets or Pritzker, but tough for most of us) or shopping during open enrollment for 2024 this fall for the best deal that doesn't involve Walgreen's, finally being able to switch when the new choice goes into effect in January. I'll pick up toothpaste and cough drops somewhere else for now, and will see what all of the pharmacies are doing about abortion pills on the fall, but if Walgreen's remains the only affordable source of a must-hav, pricey medication, that's where we'll commit to buy it in 2024.
Maybe Walgreens is just being careful. It wasn't very long ago that it paid something like $5.7 billion for dispensing opioids that were declared safe and legal by the FDA.
I have to disagree with you Eric on discontinuing the use of [sic] to indicate that the speaker or writer quoted used incorrect grammar. In many, but not all, cases I find the use of incorrect grammar diminishes the credibility of the speaker or writer for me on the subject matter. (But then again, grammar is probably racist. Why? Because everything is racist now, you can look it up! 😁)