Originally Posted by el borracho:
Perhaps time would be better spent writing and publishing a positive editorial, regarding Hill’s situation. Writing personal insults and harassing someone on social media is a pointless and trashy exercise.
The Star would never publish it. While the fat shaming is unnecessary, I do think calling her out for the article is definitely in bounds. [Reply]
Originally Posted by el borracho:
Perhaps time would be better spent writing and publishing a positive editorial, regarding Hill’s situation. Writing personal insults and harassing someone on social media is a pointless and trashy exercise.
Hey Lew, we have our first poster for the beta list. [Reply]
Originally Posted by el borracho:
Perhaps time would be better spent writing and publishing a positive editorial, regarding Hill’s situation. Writing personal insults and harassing someone on social media is a pointless and trashy exercise.
I understand your reasoning, but she's really asked for this level of scrutiny.
Originally Posted by Willie Lanier:
I understand your reasoning, but she's really asked for this level of scrutiny.
She sucks at her job.
End of story in my book
It's more than just sucking at her job. She had a personal agenda to push that put a man's freedom and ability to earn a living in serious jeopardy. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BigCatDaddy:
It's more than just sucking at her job. She had a personal agenda to push that put a man's freedom and ability to earn a living in serious jeopardy.
I'm not sure sure if you're serious; I have a tough time discerning sarcasm with millenials these days.
Originally Posted by 007:
The Star would never publish it. While the fat shaming is unnecessary, I do think calling her out for the article is definitely in bounds.
Calling her fat in about 10% as devastating as ruining a man's career over false allegations that he abused his child.
Nobody MADE them **** with Hill...he was living his life about to make $20 mil a year.
They did it to further their career....**** them in the eye. They weren't ever remotely objective about it either...
Normally, I'd agree but not in this case...they brought it on themselves. [Reply]
Originally Posted by BlackOp:
Nope...give her dose of public ridicule. I want her run out of town in shame...maybe she'll learn there are real consequences.
Originally Posted by Sweet Daddy Hate:
Not really, and we get to be hurtful to a fraud who deserves to hurt.
And we know it bothers her. Breaks her fat little heart.
Going to have to agree to disagree on this. The shit "journalism" should be the only thing we focus on with her. Going after anything else is just regressing back to grade school insults and will cause no harm at all. It also diminishes the gravity of what was really done. [Reply]
Originally Posted by 007:
Going to have to agree to disagree on this. The shit "journalism" should be the only thing we focus on with her. Going after anything else is just regressing back to grade school insults and will cause no harm at all. It also diminishes the gravity of what was really done.
Just like Fat Brooke...you have a choice. She made hers...as did the rest of The Star. Now they pay...nothing is free. [Reply]
Originally Posted by 007:
Going to have to agree to disagree on this. The shit "journalism" should be the only thing we focus on with her. Going after anything else is just regressing back to grade school insults and will cause no harm at all. It also diminishes the gravity of what was really done.
Maybe beta, but I have to reluctantly agree.
As cathartic as they are, personal attacks unrelated to her failures as a professional give her an out to go into AOC/Ilhan Omar/Kathy Neuman mode.
Trudge knee deep in shit and shove their foot in their mouth, then when people respond, they rally the troops with 'I was vilely attacked, I feared for my life, my opposition is unhinged and we must prevail!!' [Reply]
Originally Posted by 007:
The Star would never publish it. While the fat shaming is unnecessary, I do think calling her out for the article is definitely in bounds.
Agreed. Professional criticism is fair play. And I wouldn’t be too sure that a well-written article about presumed innocence and professional journalism would go unpublished- we have Keitzman’s example of the backlash and consequences of reckless op-ed journalism. Perhaps the star would like to backtrack a bit at this point. [Reply]
