3 ms·
It appears to me that the parent post was criticizing the ad-based business model - not endorsing it.
by coffeecat 6y ago
It appears to me that the parent post was criticizing the ad-based business model - not endorsing it.
- stonogo 6y agoI'm complaining about the structure of the dialog around this issue, not casting aspersions on the parent post's argument itself. It's impossible to have a reasonable discussion when the terminology in use is strongly prejudiced against one of the key parties in the relationship.
- bhupy 6y agoReality is strongly prejudiced against one of the key parties in the relationship. Users, today, tolerate ads in exchange for free content. Any reasonable discussion — where continued delivery of content is a desired end goal — needs to come up with an answer for how we pay for it. Calling out "fundamental flaws" is one such way of doing that.
- coffeecat 6y agoStating things nakedly, using the assumptions and perspective of the big guy, can be a powerful rhetorical style when advocating for the little guy. See any of Chomsky's political writing as an example.