|
MiGoreng and Farmers Union Ice Coffee are the only things you need in life
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 10:50 |
|
|
QUACKTASTIC posted:MiGoreng and Farmers Union Ice Coffee are the only things you need in life Enjoy getting scurvy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 01:32
|
|
|
Starshark posted:I was quoting a goon who said a similar thing except he was talking about going to restaurants. You know, proper restaurants. Where you go with friends. I'm choosing to believe it was your opinion anyway and will use it to paint you as an idiot in the future if we should ever disagree on some unrelated point.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 01:32
|
|
|
QUACKTASTIC posted:MiGoreng and FTFY Because I'm lactose intolerant, and also dairy is ethically abhorrent and you sir are worse than satan,
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 01:33
|
|
|
Starshark posted:Where you go with friends. I do not comprehend.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 01:37
|
|
|
lol if the media reform ends up a combo of deregulation and trying to get Google/Facebook to pay taxes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 01:40
|
|
|
Don Dongington posted:you sir are worse than satan, Imagine preferring soy milk over being worse than satan.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 01:43
|
|
|
Something I've always wondered about is why TV broadcasting licenses were (are, although it doesn't matter so much anymore) so restricted? Is it just to protect the existing channels from competition, or is there more to it?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 01:46
|
|
|
QUACKTASTIC posted:MiGoreng and Farmers Union Ice Coffee are the only things you need in life Dear god, do you smell like the toilet at a Magic the Gathering comp?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 01:51
|
|
|
Don Dongington posted:Because I'm lactose intolerant, and also dairy is ethically abhorrent and you sir are worse than satan, There is no such thing as ethical capitalism so your nut juice isn't pure either. ------------------------ I hope we're not stopping Australias Piss Pig Grandad https://twitter.com/nswpolice/status/875139705792221186
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 01:53
|
|
|
open24hours posted:Something I've always wondered about is why TV broadcasting licenses were (are, although it doesn't matter so much anymore) so restricted? Is it just to protect the existing channels from competition, or is there more to it? there is a technical limit to how much bandwidth there is to transmit on, but I don't know if that's all there is to it
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 01:55
|
|
|
Yeah but it's more than five channels.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 01:58
|
|
|
[quote="Bogan King" post="473410095"] There is no such thing as ethical capitalism so your nut juice isn't pure either. ------------------------ Oh well in that case *drinks coal slurry*
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 02:11
|
|
|
Still would over almond milk.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 02:13
|
|
|
open24hours posted:Something I've always wondered about is why TV broadcasting licenses were (are, although it doesn't matter so much anymore) so restricted? Is it just to protect the existing channels from competition, or is there more to it? Its to protect against one person/group owning all the media outlets in one city/state, because a free and fearless media is an important part of an open democracy and if one person owns it all then they would have too much power to shape public discourse. Which is yet another thing we have completely hosed up in australia.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 02:16
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Studio10au/status/875149232159703040 Why on earth is a TV show directly lobbying on TV for a particular government Bill to pass? SURELY, the collapse of Network 10 isn't some immense cartel-like conspiracy to extort media reforms that directly benefit the shareholders of Network 10...? Surely Australian politics isn't THAT corrupt... Surely... surely...
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 02:28
|
|
|
NPR Journalizard posted:Its to protect against one person/group owning all the media outlets in one city/state, because a free and fearless media is an important part of an open democracy and if one person owns it all then they would have too much power to shape public discourse. I understand the rationale behind the ownership restrictions, but I don't understand why there's such a high barrier to entry for TV. Surely it isn't that there are only five companies interested in running a TV station in Australia? I guess it's all academic now that internet speeds are fast enough for streaming video.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 02:32
|
|
|
Rupert gonna buy it. Fox News For All!
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 02:32
|
|
|
Kafka Syrup posted:https://twitter.com/Studio10au/status/875149232159703040 You're new to this, aren't you?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 02:35
|
|
|
open24hours posted:I understand the rationale behind the ownership restrictions, but I don't understand why there's such a high barrier to entry for TV. Surely it isn't that there are only five companies interested in running a TV station in Australia? I guess it's all academic now that internet speeds are fast enough for streaming video. You ask this question in a politics thread. Take a wild guess.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 02:38
|
|
|
You Am I posted:You're new to this, aren't you? I am but a young, naive hack.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 02:38
|
|
|
open24hours posted:I understand the rationale behind the ownership restrictions, but I don't understand why there's such a high barrier to entry for TV. Surely it isn't that there are only five companies interested in running a TV station in Australia? I guess it's all academic now that internet speeds are fast enough for streaming video. The airspace is valuable and it can be sold for more elsewhere. See how the government are pulling community tv off the air this month.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 02:40
|
|
|
Maybe if Channel 10 wasn't a flaming pile of dogshit then people might watch it? I'm pretty sure this is the vaunted free market at work here, so they probably should suck it up because they wanted capitalism
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 02:48
|
|
|
Do people really buy into all this created jobs fluff? I'd love to think a guy stuck in a terrible, low paying job who barely gets enough hours to feed his family is going to see these figues and be impressed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 02:49
|
|
|
Most likely Rupert Murdoch is lobbying the liberals to change the media ownership laws, arguing that if they could just give him a TV channel, they will definitely win the next election. It doesn't matter that all 3 private networks skew massively right and shill for the Liberals anyway - because the Project exists, 10 has to go. So Rupes will buy 10, rename it to Fox10, gut any local non-reality content and drop overheads by not having to pay himself for the Simpsons etc, but mostly operate it as a platform to run editorialised news programming that will make ACA blush.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 02:54
|
|
|
RIP Toadie.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 02:54
|
|
|
Cartoon posted:Also (and I know I am going to regret this) Hobo Erotica it is (yet another) an example of kicking down, not up. If a fat person commentates on their difficulties in society it is completely different to a thin/average weight person complaining about the difficulties of having a fat person around. As a journalist the nuance of this should be constantly on their mind when making copy. It is a fine line between empathy and advocacy to outright fat shaming. It wasn't a complaint, and it wasn't really kicking. Mia is a huge fan of Roxanne and that was abundantly clear before, during, and after the interview. Look, mentioning the planning process was meant in the same vein as the interview. You're right, it is a fine line, and this was a slip. It was a mistake, it was insensitive, and it's been acknowledged as such and unreservedly apologized for. Mia is explicitly about positive body image and acceptance. So, my question is about the vitriolic response directed towards Mia, which seems to go far beyond this issue. If it is such a fine line, why so much hate? And don't say 'interns' because none of it was about that. If you're going with the "kicking down" thing, it feels closer to something like "accidentally touched her with her foot" rather than "deliberately and maliciously kicked her down." I guess I'm talking mostly about the way pedestrian covered it, but the comments on SMH and ABC and everything else are the same. People are likening it bludgeoning her with a gavel, disgusting, etc, calling her a horrible oval office, shameful, trash, pathetic arsehole, literally sickening etc. It's hard to believe they really care that much about the planning details for Gay's book tour being mentioned in the context of how different it is for people of different sizes to exist in the world, it seems like there is something else going on. She wasn't trashing another woman's body, she was saying it makes some things logistically tricky, that was the point. To be honest I think that part of the problem was that Roxanne didn't know about the questions that her publicist asked and was surprised to learn them. It looks like we have a woman who has independently built a women's media platform from nothing, in a landscape (and culture) dominated by male voices, she talks honestly and openly about all sorts of things, specifically about being a woman today. And she's just being jumped on, not just for this, but for her whole career. And that's interesting to me, and I thought it would be here too. Especially since we're talking about media networks coming and going etc. A lot of the attacks seem gendered and its surprising what people let pass. I've asked people to give me any examples of how shes an anti-feminist or whatever, but no results yet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 03:11
|
|
|
I only lurked LF; never posted. But I do remember the great debate in D&D Auspol re: beetroot vs pineapple on a burger
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 03:23
|
|
|
Endman posted:I only lurked LF; never posted. But I do remember the great debate in D&D Auspol re: beetroot vs pineapple on a burger What debate? Pineapple and hot sauce was unanimously agreed upon from memory.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 03:27
|
|
|
Endman posted:I only lurked LF; never posted. But I do remember the great debate in D&D Auspol re: beetroot vs pineapple on a burger where's the egg?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
Birdstrike posted:where's the egg? on your face m8
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 03:29
|
|
|
Lizard Combatant posted:What debate? Pineapple and hot sauce was unanimously agreed upon from memory. Pineapple? Disgusting. Beetroot on a burger is god-tier burgermaking though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
Lizard Combatant posted:on your face m8 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
Birdstrike posted:where's the egg? on my kebabs
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
Hobo Erotica posted:It wasn't a complaint, and it wasn't really kicking. Mia is a huge fan of Roxanne and that was abundantly clear before, during, and after the interview. Look, mentioning the planning process was meant in the same vein as the interview. You're right, it is a fine line, and this was a slip. It was a mistake, it was insensitive, and it's been acknowledged as such and unreservedly apologized for. Mia is explicitly about positive body image and acceptance. So, my question is about the vitriolic response directed towards Mia, which seems to go far beyond this issue. If it is such a fine line, why so much hate? And don't say 'interns' because none of it was about that. A woman hosed up, so it's getting much more attention and reprobation in the public sphere, but she still hosed up. Calling herself Fat and writing about her experience doesn't give licence to other people to say they don't like saying fat so you're actually 'clinically super morbidly obese' - like, thanks that feels so much more empowering than THE F WORD that only seems to be scary to women who've never seen the wrong side of a 26 BMI. eta: my only regular exposure to her is via mamamia spoilers so I don't exactly have a high opinion of them anyway. It's clickbait gossip rags dressing up in digital shoes and trying to pretend it's better/different than women's day. G-Spot Run fucked around with this message at 03:37 on Jun 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 03:34
|
|
|
Kafka Syrup posted:Surely Australian politics isn't THAT corrupt... Surely... surely... Helicopter rides, government entitlement rorts, bags of cash, head of the ATO caught in a massive tax rort... Failing a business in such a way to get around media ownership laws??? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 03:35
|
|
|
TF2 HAT MINING RIG posted:Do people really buy into all this created jobs fluff? I'd love to think a guy stuck in a terrible, low paying job who barely gets enough hours to feed his family is going to see these figues and be impressed. Yes. But if the UK has taught us anything, you can only lie about it so much before people stop believing you.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 03:35
|
|
|
GoldStandardConure posted:on my kebabs I just threw up a bit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 03:35
|
|
|
G-Spot Run posted:A woman hosed up, so it's getting much more attention and reprobation in the public sphere, but she still hosed up. Calling herself Fat and writing about her experience doesn't give licence to other people to say they don't like saying fat so you're actually 'clinically super morbidly obese' - like, thanks that feels so much more empowering than THE F WORD that only seems to be scary to women who've never seen the wrong side of a 26 BMI. "Super morbidly obese" is the clinical term, "fat" is pretty generic and doesn't really provide the right detail. I think that's what she meant when she said she didn't want to say fat in the intro. It wasn't scary to her, she said fat throughout the interview. Again, arguably insensitive, but hardly worth the shame it's brought.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 03:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 10:50 |
|
|
Beetroot should not be on burgers. Pineapple only if it's a special pineapple burger like the pinegalo.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 03:42
|
|