4 ms·

Is it "signalling" when the left's change was for an accessibility reason, to enable more people to be able to easily read? Signaling means there's no tangible

Is it "signalling" when the left's change was for an accessibility reason, to enable more people to be able to easily read? Signaling means there's no tangible benefit to the change, so the Blinken's switch to a sans-serif font would not be signaling. Rubio, however, specifically pointed out the symbolic (and malicious) gesture of his whole switch back to Times New Roman. The left didn't react pettily. Please stop thinking the left are the right are the same when the facts show they are not. The left's change was for a demonstrative benefit. The right is doing it so fuck over people. You think these are the same.

SpicyLemonZest 10mo ago
I think the concept of an accessible font is signaling. I don't think that Times New Roman is actually less legible than Calibri, and have never seen research claiming to find that Times New Roman in particular or serifs in general pose accessibility problems.
- foldr 10mo ago
  I easily found some research by searching Google scholar: https://www.scitepress.org/Papers/2021/109668/109668.pdf https://www.scitepress.org/Papers/2021/109668/109668.pdf It's not a big difference, but apparently TNR was the worst of the fonts tested for OCR. But anyway, there was no "signaling" about the change to Calibri. No-one ever tried to make a political issue out of it the way Rubio is now.
  - SpicyLemonZest 10mo ago
    I’m not sure what you think I mean by “signaling”. This is a study of OCR performance, with no attempt to measure practical accessibility issues caused by the font difference which you and I agree is not big. I’m still very skeptical that even a single State Department employee’s ability to do a good job depends on which font the department uses. If you say that it doesn’t matter whether changing the font had a large practical impact, because it’s a gesture in the right direction or helps build a culture of accessibility, I would classify that as signaling.
    - foldr 10mo ago
      Classify it how you like, but a gesture towards building a culture of accessibility (if indeed that’s what this was) is hardly comparable to an attempt to score points against political opponents.
- estearum 10mo ago
  "Decisions I know nothing about are signaling" is a phenomenally uncurious approach to life.
JetSetWilly 10mo ago
[flagged]
- oneeyedpigeon 10mo ago
  Note that, even if that's all true (and I do agree that studies should have been conducted), the two positions are: a) We made this change because we think it will help certain people and b) We made this change because we fundamentally disagree with attempts to help certain people, whether effective or not I think b) is a lot worse than a). Or, to put it another way, has the current administration demonstrated a benefit from this change, or are they behaving at least as badly as "the left"?
  - JetSetWilly 10mo ago
    No, you're just falling into the sort of left wing "people who disagree with me can only do so because they are a bad person" trap. You can read the full text of the actual memo (and a reasonable interpretation of it) below, but it appears to me that the principle reason as stated is that Calibri is less professional, inconsistent with all other government communications and even inconsistent letterheads on the very same department's material, and that appearance matters. It isn't in fact about "sticking it to the woke", but it does seem like the original decision to use Calibri was not based on anything and just about appearing to be woke. https://daringfireball.net/2025/12/full_text_of_marco_rubio_state_dept_directive_times_new_roman https://daringfireball.net/2025/12/full_text_of_marco_rubio_...
    - oneeyedpigeon 10mo ago
      > No, you're just falling into the sort of left wing "people who disagree with me can only do so because they are a bad person" trap. I'm not sure where this conclusion came from. I even acknowledged that the original change was problematic. > the principle reason as stated is that Calibri is less professional That's fair, but it doesn't erase the 'DEI' comment in the memo. If that weren't there, we might actually be having a discussion about the merits of one font vs. another. > It isn't in fact about "sticking it to the woke" Again, that might be believable if the memo hadn't explicitly complained about DEI.
mathgradthrow 10mo ago
>Is it "signalling" when the left's change was for an accessibility reason, to enable more people to be able to easily read? Uh, yes.

SpicyLemonZest 10mo ago

I think the concept of an accessible font is signaling. I don't think that Times New Roman is actually less legible than Calibri, and have never seen research claiming to find that Times New Roman in particular or serifs in general pose accessibility problems.

foldr 10mo ago
I easily found some research by searching Google scholar: https://www.scitepress.org/Papers/2021/109668/109668.pdf https://www.scitepress.org/Papers/2021/109668/109668.pdf It's not a big difference, but apparently TNR was the worst of the fonts tested for OCR. But anyway, there was no "signaling" about the change to Calibri. No-one ever tried to make a political issue out of it the way Rubio is now.
- SpicyLemonZest 10mo ago
  I’m not sure what you think I mean by “signaling”. This is a study of OCR performance, with no attempt to measure practical accessibility issues caused by the font difference which you and I agree is not big. I’m still very skeptical that even a single State Department employee’s ability to do a good job depends on which font the department uses. If you say that it doesn’t matter whether changing the font had a large practical impact, because it’s a gesture in the right direction or helps build a culture of accessibility, I would classify that as signaling.
  - foldr 10mo ago
    Classify it how you like, but a gesture towards building a culture of accessibility (if indeed that’s what this was) is hardly comparable to an attempt to score points against political opponents.
estearum 10mo ago
"Decisions I know nothing about are signaling" is a phenomenally uncurious approach to life.

JetSetWilly 10mo ago

[flagged]

oneeyedpigeon 10mo ago
Note that, even if that's all true (and I do agree that studies should have been conducted), the two positions are: a) We made this change because we think it will help certain people and b) We made this change because we fundamentally disagree with attempts to help certain people, whether effective or not I think b) is a lot worse than a). Or, to put it another way, has the current administration demonstrated a benefit from this change, or are they behaving at least as badly as "the left"?
- JetSetWilly 10mo ago
  No, you're just falling into the sort of left wing "people who disagree with me can only do so because they are a bad person" trap. You can read the full text of the actual memo (and a reasonable interpretation of it) below, but it appears to me that the principle reason as stated is that Calibri is less professional, inconsistent with all other government communications and even inconsistent letterheads on the very same department's material, and that appearance matters. It isn't in fact about "sticking it to the woke", but it does seem like the original decision to use Calibri was not based on anything and just about appearing to be woke. https://daringfireball.net/2025/12/full_text_of_marco_rubio_state_dept_directive_times_new_roman https://daringfireball.net/2025/12/full_text_of_marco_rubio_...
  - oneeyedpigeon 10mo ago
    > No, you're just falling into the sort of left wing "people who disagree with me can only do so because they are a bad person" trap. I'm not sure where this conclusion came from. I even acknowledged that the original change was problematic. > the principle reason as stated is that Calibri is less professional That's fair, but it doesn't erase the 'DEI' comment in the memo. If that weren't there, we might actually be having a discussion about the merits of one font vs. another. > It isn't in fact about "sticking it to the woke" Again, that might be believable if the memo hadn't explicitly complained about DEI.

mathgradthrow 10mo ago

>Is it "signalling" when the left's change was for an accessibility reason, to enable more people to be able to easily read? Uh, yes.