Message from @Arch-Fiend
Discord ID: 508112805518639124
who the fuck said there was stealing here?
This person
is that the person i shared a video about?
I'm just referring to the event and giving my take on it
I never said anything about you
You did refute a claim that, to my knowledge, no one in the discussion brought up.
It's a bit jarring.
Fair enough
In any case as a leader for a non-profit I can sympathize with the dilemma St Jude's faced here.
indeed, its almost like you needed something to argue about when your other arguements wernt effective so you brought someone else who wasent in the room who said something you could argue about that was related to the topic so you could maintain your postition
"were talking about ideology getting between children and charity" is what you said. I am responding to say that this is not the case since the money is being returned and the donors can still give directly.
WSJ may be responcible for pressuring various people into actions, they have done so in the past along with the entire mainstream media. adpocolypse. theres no proof that they were responcible or did that but i think those who do blame WSJ arnt unfounded in their reasoning
It can, that's true. But there was an action taken that, had it not been done, would have allowed the money to already be where it was going.
It did add a complication but it is the media's role to report.
as for ideology getting between children and charity, this event delayed the donations by time, that is technicly getting in the way. additionally it put hoops to jump through that naturally in terms of hundreds of people will cause a loss in donation
I't not exactly sure what the WSJ was trying to accomplish here. I can think of other things that seem more appropriate for the "illuminating light".
it IS putting idology between children and charity by making it more difficult
The the organization at fault would be St Jude's themselves and not the WSJ.
also insitivized donations are a thing, they have been a thing for hundreds of years and are very common to this day. what do you think GGDQ is?
another example of ideology between children and charity
Oh, I know. I'm old enough to remember the Jerry Lewis Telethon.
if someone says they will break your fingers if you dont stop talking to someone even though that person didint tell you to stop talking to them is it your fault your not talking to them or is there some blame for the person who threatened you?
also this isint the fucking debate channel
All the WSJ did was report what everyone seems to agree was the truth. It is St Jude that decided not to take the money. I would say the real fault would lie with the far left that makes it so clear "if you don't stand with us you stand against us" or some such bullshit.
you really dont know how hitpieces work do you?
do you even know how the adpocolypes happened?
I am somewhat familiar with demonetization but honestly this was the first time i heard the "adpocolypse" term used
this isint unusual, news media has the unique position of being able to appear to be the arbitrators of truth while pushing moral opinion in order to put peer pressure and boycots against companys and public entities
I also know the WSJ to be a respectable center-right paper. It's not some bullshit rag like Huffpost
i think pewdiepie would disagree with you
I don't even know who that is so I'll have to take your word for it
are you a troll?
Really, I am sorry for raising your blood pressure
It wasn't my intention I assure you
I...I suppose it could be possible you don't know who pewdiepie is.
But this is the internet. It's like walking into Boston and saying you don't know who the Kennedy's are.
Remember, eight days ago I was comfortably ensconced in my NYT and WP bubble
I've been very open about that