well wikipedia has more visits then those huge for profit companies when it comes to "information".
hell i would think technically they are #1 since youtube traffic, i mean really how much of their video's are the "information" you speak vs entertainment? I'd probably say 85/15%?
How much of google search is relative to this information vs entertainment? Maybe 50/50?
Buh Byeeeeeeeeeeee !!
The functional limit on what you can print is what the newspaper is willing to let you print. Because they're commercial enterprises beholden to advertisers, shareholders, and sometimes CEOs/owners with a strong political agenda.
If you're talking about being arrested for something you print - in the US that'd either come under incitement or obscenity. The US is notoriously lax on the concept of incitement, that's why hate groups can get away with so much there, basically unless you literally call on people to murder a specific person you'll probably get off. It's pretty ridiculous really. Obscenity on the other hand ended up strictly enforced due to conservative moral crusading in the late 20th Century - and conservative SC justices were happy to waive any First Amendment concerns, see eg "FCC v. Pacifica".
So in America you can chant "throw the Jews in the ovens" all you want, but god help you if you say "fuck".
- - - Updated - - -
Are you suggesting that billion-dollar corporations running effective monopolies or cartels with lax cross-media ownership laws is a bad thing? Or the media being in the hands of big business who are accountable only to the profit incentive and the whims of their executives and owners, and not to the truth or the people? Or that the government has a role to play in regulating free enterprise?
You must be a Communist!
- - - Updated - - -
That book was dropped solely because the company planning to print it calculated that it'd do more damage to their brand than it would make in sales profiteering off the scandal.
Nothing stopping its publication legally, however depending on the laws of the state it's possible that OJ himself couldn't share in the profits due to "proceeds of crime" laws.
- - - Updated - - -
And once again Chuck Tingle steals the thread.
- - - Updated - - -
I'm outside the US and I know who Yang is. The latter may apply to me though. We watch your politics like it's a trashy reality TV show. Or maybe post-apocalyptic sci fi.
https://www.thecut.com/2021/01/rep-j...tol-riots.html
Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal has tested positive now, and this is likely the second case to come from Republican members of Congress refusing to wear their masks before the insurrection and those that continued to flout the rules afterwards.
If more test positive every member that refused to wear their mask or flouted the rules should be expelled from Congress. This isn't a fuckin game.
Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
“Whoever said the pen is mightier than the sword obviously never encountered automatic weapons.”
"His knowledge on that topic is only power point deep..." "Power corrupts and PowerPoint corrupts absolutely."
"Who's the more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows him?"
I'm curious.
Are you saying if a congressman pulls a gun on the floor and shoots another congressman in the face, killing them, they should face absolutely no consequences as they are "elected"?
Is that what you are saying?
Because willfully spreading a deadly pathogen to others is basically the same.
It's been really fucking fascinating watching Cons shift gears into wanting Big Government to control the operation of private business because catering to them being hateful fuckheads is a monetary liability.
Side comment but If a patriots army beating, with the American flag, a cop to death, doesn't make you realize what fascism is and how works nothing will
me everytime someone uses communist, socialist, marxist and anarchist incorrectly :
![]()