Disqus - Latest Comments for trenchcoat

Re: In Defense of Eating at Chick-fil-A

trench — Fri, 27 Jul 2012 17:26:42 -0000

"... For the economy."

It's just another reason to blame those that aren't ultra-conservative for the bad economy.

A bad economy couldn't have anything to do with a massive lack of national infrastructure plans, corporations making record profits while laying people off in record numbers, a global economic crises, climate change, or even Capitalism itself...

... No, no. Our bad economy is to be blamed on liberals not eating at Chick-fil-A.

#trickledownlogic

Re: In Defense of Eating at Chick-fil-A

trench — Fri, 27 Jul 2012 12:01:22 -0000

Oh, please. Our history is riddled with successful boycotts based on ideological stances. Most of which have come from boycotting products (companies) which advertise during a television show, radio show, or publication which had chosen to take a public ideological stance on a given subject. Most recently, for example, the boycott against Limbaugh advertisers. But this goes back, in modern civilization, as far as news programs (and publications) like 60 Minutes and, even more predominantly, Soap Operas -- both the televised variety as well as their earlier radio broadcasted predecessors.

It's always proved to be one of the most effective means of protest against businesses that willingly choose to go public with an ideological expression, publicly recognized PR, and/or outright propaganda. If the model works, why would you recommend changing it?

My guess? You're a publication which has, first-hand, experienced examples of the above described advertiser boycotts/protests, and you are using this rather timely and popular example as a means to publish propaganda against such tactics.

The clarity of the goal of your article is rather quite astounding... whomever proposed its authorship should be deeply ashamed, though I highly doubt they are. Freedom of Assembly will always trump Freedom of Financial PR, no matter how much of it you try to push upon the public.

PS Why are you deleting my comment? Truth hurts?

Re: Google code reveals inner Circles, a social secret weapon?

trench — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 03:17:12 -0000

Couldn't agree more. Link to the source, Engadget, not your competition. Lulz.

Re: Chavez: U.S. distorting situation in Libya 'to justify an invasion'

trench — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 12:53:38 -0000

Wrong. It's not spam, it's a protest. People, en masse, are reposting a single user's comment because it was deleted by CNN without any reason other than the opinion it asserted. Do a bit of research (like reading through the comments) before making assumptions.

Re: Chavez: U.S. distorting situation in Libya 'to justify an invasion'

trench — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 01:19:47 -0000

Ironwil616, why do you assume Corporate Profit is synonymous with National Profit?

"We'd be flush with cash right about now."

No we wouldn't. The oil companies would. And they are. Along with all of their partners in crime. How else would they be able to afford to advertise "Clean Coal" propaganda on CNN during every commercial break?

Re: Chavez: U.S. distorting situation in Libya 'to justify an invasion'

trench — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 00:25:51 -0000

FWIW, we are not bots.

Speaking for myself... as much as I would love to be a bot (the beeping kind, not the bzzzkrt'ing kind), I am not. I'm a flesh and blood censorship hating 35 year old. I am one of many. And we, as adults, clearly recognize that the comment appearing multiple times here did not break the Terms of Service agreement between the user and CNN. Yet, it was deleted by CNN. Why? I don't know, ask CNN.

Censorship will not be tolerated in the New World.

Welcome to the New World.

Re: Chavez: U.S. distorting situation in Libya 'to justify an invasion'

trench — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 00:03:00 -0000

We didn't invade Rwanda, we didn't invade East Timor, we didn't invade Darfur. No one here gave a damn about those people because our corporate controlled media didn't direct you to. These corporations want Libyan oil, and now YOU are up in arms and demanding invasion. See the connection?

Re: Chavez: U.S. distorting situation in Libya 'to justify an invasion'

trench — Tue, 01 Mar 2011 23:58:26 -0000

Re: Facebook Goes Down Amid Rollout of New Brand Pages [UPDATED]

trench — Thu, 16 Dec 2010 17:00:49 -0000

Because "contacted" infers contact has been established. "Reached out to" infers that contact has been attempted without successfully returned communication.

Re: Facebook Goes Down Amid Rollout of New Brand Pages [UPDATED]

trench — Thu, 16 Dec 2010 16:55:33 -0000

I really enjoy the no-index look for Facebook and hope they stick with their new rebellious design.

Re: Facebook Goes Down Amid Rollout of New Brand Pages [UPDATED]

trench — Thu, 16 Dec 2010 16:52:49 -0000

have even, not even have!

Re: What Mark Zuckerberg Told TIME About Wikileaks

trench — Wed, 15 Dec 2010 20:21:36 -0000

Absolutely agree with your entire statement, save for one bit toward the beginning.

Google should not be thrown into the Zuckerbucket. As mass communication advances and matures, it will naturally erode privacy at the individual level. Google comprehends this and attempts to adjust to the natural erosion as it occurs, whereas Zuckerberg is trying to expedite the erosion as a means of controlling the erosion.

Once Google speaks up on the matter, and they will eventually have to, I think you'll find these differences blatantly obvious. Afterall, Google [Cache] is by far the largest host of leaked data online. Everything that affects Wikileaks will ultimately affect Google searches, from books and magazines to leaks and torrents. Whereas, to Facebook, Wikileaks is just another user. What happens re: Wikileaks doesn't affect Facebook in the slightest.

Re: 2010 Spike TV Video Game Awards: Who Won?

trench — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 22:13:06 -0000

Sadly, I haven't played Red Dead Redemption yet. :/ (I know, I know.) I only recently picked up an Xbox 360 slim and have an entire library to catch up on. Read Dead being one of the list-toppers, but it's a very long list.

Re: P&G Washes Its Hands of Soap Operas and Dives into Social Media

trench — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 19:53:49 -0000

I'm usually up on all things news as soon as they are news and somehow missed this story, so I'm glad RWW made the decision to run with it. Even at the cost of one person's disappointment.

Re: P&G Washes Its Hands of Soap Operas and Dives into Social Media

trench — Tue, 14 Dec 2010 19:45:33 -0000

I grew up on Guiding Light. Have a lot of respect for Soaps and the rich history they held (and still hold). Unfortunately, P&G showed little-to-no respect for these institutions in the times that really mattered. If you have a moment, read an article or two on how they treated Michael Zaslow (Roger Thorpe on GL) when the long-time GL actor found himself suffering from Lou Gehrig Disease (they fired him). [He was also a member of Starfleet on an old ep of ST:TOS.] It's quite analogous to how they treated the entire property (Guiding Light) as it contracted severely low ratings. I have no problem with the show's eventual cancellation... every show must face this ultimate demise... but Guiding Light was the longest running serial in the history of serials (having originally come from radio), it was the longest running television series, and it was also the first Soap to experiment with media-crossover podcasts (the show traversed the birth of three entirely new mediums) -- it deserved a grandiose send-off rather than the road-side, seriously horrid, fast-food funeral it was given. This wasn't just P&G's fault... there's a lot of blame to spread around. P&G, though, had the power to fight for something better. And, as already stated, they have a history of not doing precisely that.

I'd be weary of any Social Webs getting sponsorship from P&G.

Re: 2010 Spike TV Video Game Awards: Who Won?

trench — Mon, 13 Dec 2010 23:53:46 -0000

I caught a bit of the "award show". It sucked. Sure, it was awesome seeing the trailers for the coming games (somehow I totally missed the Batman one you posted, danke for that), and NPH is pretty rad, but the award show was shit. Most likely because it's a SpikeTV production. 95% of the pre-written, teleprompter haha's received nothing but cricket chirps. It was just sad.

Remind me why this is on SpikeTV?

Re: Facebook Alternative Diaspora Launches Their Private Alpha With Some Bet Hedging

trench — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 01:40:11 -0000

<facebookkiller>Diaspora is an anagram for "Rap as I do".</facebookkiller>

Re: #IAmSpartacus: Thousands Tweet in Support of Convicted Airport Joker

trench — Fri, 12 Nov 2010 15:05:57 -0000

This is excellent.

I'm not sure that this is a freedom of speech issue so much as it is a lack of regard for contextual interpretation issue. It's all about context, people. Context is something that keeps getting more and more skewed by the day. But then again, I'm sure the people that need to understand this won't understand this... and they are now forced to believe that there are thousands of people who are, literally, Spartacus. And that they are blowing up Robin Hood.

Re: As Buzz Sounds More Like Crickets, Does Google Need To Be More Patient?

trench — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 19:51:35 -0000

You're ignorant. And the two people that liked your comment are ignorant.

Buzz was, at no point, a competitor of Twitter. Google's Twitter competitor was (is?) Jaiku.com. If you were unaware of this then you probably should reserve your opinion until you've absorbed an adequate amount of education to speak on this subject.

Re: Does Using Yahoo Mail Lower Your Credit Score?

trench — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 04:36:34 -0000

I wouldn't put too much blame in the wrong bucket here... this is what Arrington considers "journalism" -- these articles are happy meals made to his specifications. And, to his point, we are here... reading it, and commenting on it. But our reasons have absolutely nothing to do with journalism.

Re: The MySpace Redesign Is Almost Here—Some Details

trench — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 01:40:42 -0000

Glitter-rats rock.

Re: The MySpace Redesign Is Almost Here—Some Details

trench — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 01:38:11 -0000

What? You are blaming this on Rupert? BS. I don't like MySpace, and I certainly don't like NewsCorp, but people didn't leave MySpace because of the site's new owner... people left because it was a Chaotic mess. Facebook brought the people a much-wanted social network which seemed to establish Order (even if it is the nazirrific sort). The people traded up; 'twas the people who sold out.

Re: Does Using Yahoo Mail Lower Your Credit Score?

trench — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 01:25:33 -0000

So, by proxy, having a Flickr account means you are likely to have a lower credit score.

Re: Could Apple Buy Sony? Absolutely Not

trench — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 15:54:13 -0000

One thing on acquiring Disney -- it actually makes sense. Perhaps that was the secret deal penned by the heads of Pixar when they, without much of a visible struggle, let Disney acquire the company in 2006.

Most of the people that were waiting for Pixar's distribution contract to end with Disney fully expected them to separate from Disney, and actually become it's main competitor (a contest Pixar easily would have won). But Pixar didn't fight for that independence... rather, they rolled over and let the succubus suck them in. The result: Pixar - property of Disney.

Disney shareholders haven't been happy with the company in many, many years (with the exception of the Pixar acquisition), so it's quite plausible that the plan, all along, was for Jobs, Lasseter, and co. to choose to *not* fight Disney in the market... but rather, acquire it a few years down the road.

These are all men that have a great deal of respect for Disney's properties. I could see them choosing to reshape Disney into the dream-machine Walt originally dreamt it to be rather than to fight it in an attempt to topple the castle.

Walt Disney and Steve Jobs are both iconic monoliths that somehow echo one another in charisma, ambition, and draconian charm. And quite I'm sure they both would agree.

This makes sense. On a lot of levels... it just makes sense.

Re: Could Apple Buy Sony? Absolutely Not

trench — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 13:26:10 -0000

Amazing how a single question marked word can be more powerful than the summation of the entire(?) article *and* its comments, eh?

... indeed.

Actually, if they continue to be non-acquisitive, I could see Apple pulling off a full-on, aggressive, AT&T acquisition-assault within two years. "How does an empirical entity set the standard for empirical tyranny? Why, this is how, of course."