3 ms·

Ahh breitbart. The only honest, independent, impartial, and non-sellout media remaining. Everyone else is MSM-shill. /s

eugeneionesco 10y ago
So you're saying that article is not impartial? Please provide proof.
sremani 10y ago
For what its worth, You may disagree with Milo's style but the substance of his comments on the ghost busters is real and its proven the way at the box office, where Sony will not make its money back and they have canceled a planned sequel and animation movies.
- DanBC 10y ago
  > where Sony will not make its money back They've already made their money back.
  - sremani 10y ago
    Here is a link discussing this issue. http://variety.com/2016/film/news/ghostbusters-loss-sony-50-million-1201834911/ http://variety.com/2016/film/news/ghostbusters-loss-sony-50-...
yummyfajitas 10y ago
What point are you trying to make? Are you implying that the tweets Breitbart links to don't exist, by virtue of existing on Breitbart? If there is true information that is being reported only by certain sources, it is perhaps worth thinking about why. See this article by Freddy Deboer on that topic: http://fredrikdeboer.com/2016/07/20/whos-in-and-whos-out-thats-still-the-only-question/ http://fredrikdeboer.com/2016/07/20/whos-in-and-whos-out-tha... "People who gleefully trashed Justine Sacco complain about pile-ons; people who say doxing is wrong get others fired from their real-life jobs. There are no principles; there’s only who you’re cool with and who you aren’t."
tnones 10y ago
You're strawmanning. But here's the sad part: that you have to go to Breitbart of all places to get something resembling an impartial take on internet culture these days. Take the Guardian for example. They publish a bunch of outrage bait by feminist wunderchilds like Jessica Valenti or Laurie Penny, delete any comments that show how ill-informed their writings are, and then do an honest to god "study" where they prove how bad harassment is by considering any deleted comment to be harassing and abusive. The Guardian has investigated The Guardian and concluded they are impartial in the matter. Or maybe we should consult the New York Times on what happened at Reddit with Ellen Pao, to discover how she's a hero for womankind and not at all a fraud married to a fraud with a trail of clearcut evidence dangling from their bumper like noisy cans, who didn't understand the community she was trying to steer. Then of course there's all the people who share this stuff on Twitter, in between fav'ing Neil DeGrasse Tyson for his "I fucking love science" routine, on how the right-wing is irrational and not facts-based. If you know of any honest, independent, impartial and non-sellout left-leaning media that covers these topics well, I'd love to hear it. I used to call myself progressive, but now I just consider myself left libertarian, because I don't want to be confused with _those_ people.

So you're saying that article is not impartial? Please provide proof.

For what its worth, You may disagree with Milo's style but the substance of his comments on the ghost busters is real and its proven the way at the box office, where Sony will not make its money back and they have canceled a planned sequel and animation movies.

DanBC 10y ago
> where Sony will not make its money back They've already made their money back.
- sremani 10y ago
  Here is a link discussing this issue. http://variety.com/2016/film/news/ghostbusters-loss-sony-50-million-1201834911/ http://variety.com/2016/film/news/ghostbusters-loss-sony-50-...

yummyfajitas 10y ago

What point are you trying to make? Are you implying that the tweets Breitbart links to don't exist, by virtue of existing on Breitbart? If there is true information that is being reported only by certain sources, it is perhaps worth thinking about why. See this article by Freddy Deboer on that topic: http://fredrikdeboer.com/2016/07/20/whos-in-and-whos-out-thats-still-the-only-question/ http://fredrikdeboer.com/2016/07/20/whos-in-and-whos-out-tha... "People who gleefully trashed Justine Sacco complain about pile-ons; people who say doxing is wrong get others fired from their real-life jobs. There are no principles; there’s only who you’re cool with and who you aren’t."

tnones 10y ago

You're strawmanning. But here's the sad part: that you have to go to Breitbart of all places to get something resembling an impartial take on internet culture these days. Take the Guardian for example. They publish a bunch of outrage bait by feminist wunderchilds like Jessica Valenti or Laurie Penny, delete any comments that show how ill-informed their writings are, and then do an honest to god "study" where they prove how bad harassment is by considering any deleted comment to be harassing and abusive. The Guardian has investigated The Guardian and concluded they are impartial in the matter. Or maybe we should consult the New York Times on what happened at Reddit with Ellen Pao, to discover how she's a hero for womankind and not at all a fraud married to a fraud with a trail of clearcut evidence dangling from their bumper like noisy cans, who didn't understand the community she was trying to steer. Then of course there's all the people who share this stuff on Twitter, in between fav'ing Neil DeGrasse Tyson for his "I fucking love science" routine, on how the right-wing is irrational and not facts-based. If you know of any honest, independent, impartial and non-sellout left-leaning media that covers these topics well, I'd love to hear it. I used to call myself progressive, but now I just consider myself left libertarian, because I don't want to be confused with _those_ people.