@matigo sure… agree to disagree. I don't particularly care about one way or another. What I do care about is owners flexing their muscle when it comes to issues as important as which party comes to power.
@matigo the reasons for not endorsing are the problem. The editorial staff wanted to and were forced by their billionaire owners not to. The papers have endorsed candidates for a very long time, so breaking away from this tradition because your owner pressured you - that's not free speech or good journalism.
There are other papers which are happily endorsing one or the other candidate and are not being prevented from doing so.
I'm reading a rather timely book right now called Manufacturing Consent by Herman and Chomsky. They propose a "Propaganda Model" to explain why news media toes the govt line often.
The very first pillar of that model is "Ownership". As in, news media is expensive to run, so owned by exceedingly rich people, whose priorities and concerns run diametrically opposite those of working folks.
This is literally playing out today with the LATimes and WaPo.
@jussipekonen how many are there? I was tearing through the "Marcus Didius Falco" series in the middle of the year but stopped after the 5th to pace myself and to pick up some other topics. There are only 20 or so books in the series (and 20ish more in the follow up series) but I'd rather make them last!
TIL I don’t know how to stir a half filled glass of water with my non-dominant hand. Bah!
So tempted to put a .js sticker on a Saturn Vue car I spotted on the road the other day.
Dunno why I never had a global gitignore file before today. Who wants to deal with DS_Store for every repo?? :D