Louise O'Neill on manned mission to Mars: "Why not go to Venus?" (MOD Warning post 1)

Ulysses Gaze

professore wrote: »

Try listening to Ash Sarkar for 5 minutes. She's now celebrated for telling Piers Morgan she's "literally a communist". With her iPhone and creepy nails she wouldn't last 5 minutes under communism. Her brand of "politics" probably plays well with the Love Island set.

Anyone that lives calls themselves a Communist is a fool.
Anyone that calls themselves 'literally a Communist' is an ever bigger fool.

RabbleRouser2k

PlaneSpeeking wrote: »

Can't argue that as I've not read either but at least that is fair.

I used to read huffington Post, before it became 'Huffpo'...ugh...

The H-Post used to allow people to comment on their pages, and all the other stuff. Then Trump won, they changed the site name to 'Huffpo', disabled all comment features, and now print articles that completely contradict one another.
They fired a reporter, unceremoniously, when he asked questions about Hillary Clinton's health in the run up to the election-no email, no 'we're terminating your contract' etc Just complete blanket delete of his account. Clinton's health became a major question, especially when she hid the fact she had been diagnosed with pneumonia-it lead to major questions regarding her other alleged health problems.

They had no problem printing an article where someone said a white American who was jailed in Korea for taking a banner would 'finally understand what it is like to be black, white privlege etc'. A year later, that same American was dead, and the article 'edited' but without the usual 'this article was updated at....'. Archive.is showed the original.
That reporter is still on the Huffpo books, but question the 'divine' Clintons, and you're fired...

Brutefart and Halfpoo are bedfellows in my eyes.

The One Doctor

Venus would be much easier to reach by man (woman).

DickSwiveller Returns

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

I used to read huffington Post, before it became 'Huffpo'...ugh...

The H-Post used to allow people to comment on their pages, and all the other stuff. Then Trump won, they changed the site name to 'Huffpo', disabled all comment features, and now print articles that completely contradict one another.
They fired a reporter, unceremoniously, when he asked questions about Hillary Clinton's health in the run up to the election-no email, no 'we're terminating your contract' etc Just complete blanket delete of his account. Clinton's health became a major question, especially when she hid the fact she had been diagnosed with pneumonia-it lead to major questions regarding her other alleged health problems.

They had no problem printing an article where someone said a white American who was jailed in Korea for taking a banner would 'finally understand what it is like to be black, white privlege etc'. A year later, that same American was dead, and the article 'edited' but without the usual 'this article was updated at....'. Archive.is showed the original.
That reporter is still on the Huffpo books, but question the 'divine' Clintons, and you're fired...

Brutefart and Halfpoo are bedfellows in my eyes.

I have to say I quite like Breitbart. Where 90 per cent of new/current affairs websites is just the standard groupthink on most topics, at least Breitbart gives the other side. I've never understood when people whinge about certain publications (I'm not accusing you of doing this, Rabble), like when students in the UK tried to ban the Sun newspaper or Daily Mail. Just don't read the bloody thing! If people want to read it, let them. I would never read Huff-po (whatever that is) because I know I would get bored after a few minutes.

On the comments: I've noticed a lot of websites have got rid of the comments section, which I think is a shame. The comments on the Spectator's website used to be good but now they're gone. I know the Telegraph got rid of them a few months ago but brought them back because of a backlash by their readers. The Indo no longer allow comments either but I think that's to do with our defamation laws...

RabbleRouser2k

DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »

I have to say I quite like Breitbart. Where 90 per cent of new/current affairs websites is just the standard groupthink on most topics, at least Breitbart gives the other side. I've never understood when people whinge about certain publications (I'm not accusing you of doing this, Rabble), like when students in the UK tried to ban the Sun newspaper or Daily Mail. Just don't read the bloody thing! If people want to read it, let them. I would never read Huff-po (whatever that is) because I know I would get bored after a few minutes.

On the comments: I've noticed a lot of websites have got rid of the comments section, which I think is a shame. The comments on the Spectator's website used to be good but now they're gone. I know the Telegraph got rid of them a few months ago but brought them back because of a backlash by their readers. The Indo no longer allow comments either but I think that's to do with our defamation laws...

Well, Breitbart and Huffpo are online, so no paper usage, but at least Breitbart allows comments. Huffpo doesn't. So points there, for them at least. I do know a lot of their staff went on to work with Alex Jones-Milo Yiannopulos, Lauren Southern, and Ashton Whitty for example. Southern seems to be moving closer and closer to White supremacy-like organisations.

People went after the Sun because of the Page 3 girls, then seemingly weren't happy when that was removed... ya cannot win. Daily Mail and anything owned by Rupert Murdoch tends to get people going insane.

Yeah, I think the Indo ran into some troubles in the past. They used to allow comments for 48 hours, now gone.
RTE have practically disabled their comments section on the Entertainment page. But that's more out of cowardice and bad moderating than anything, tbh.

DickSwiveller Returns

https://www.rte.ie/special-reports/defining-irish-culture/

Apparently Louise is one of 25 people defining our culture. God help us all.

ginandtonicsky

To be fair I've heard of about four people on that list. Mary Nally? Jesse Jones? John Gerrard?
Someone at RTE obviously just googled "woke Irish people with more than 400 Instagram followers" and came up with that list of nobodies.

RabbleRouser2k

ginandtonicsky wrote: »

To be fair I've heard of about four people on that list. Mary Nally? Jesse Jones? John Gerrard?
Someone at RTE obviously just googled "woke Irish people with more than 400 Instagram followers" and came up with that list of nobodies.

I doubt any of those folks could get arrested in their localities, never mind noticed anywhere else.

There's elements of snarkiness too-stuff like 'she doesn't have a Leaving Cert-omg, she's such a troglodyte'...

DickSwiveller Returns

DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »

I have to say I quite like Breitbart. Where 90 per cent of new/current affairs websites is just the standard groupthink on most topics, at least Breitbart gives the other side. I've never understood when people whinge about certain publications (I'm not accusing you of doing this, Rabble), like when students in the UK tried to ban the Sun newspaper or Daily Mail. Just don't read the bloody thing! If people want to read it, let them. I would never read Huff-po (whatever that is) because I know I would get bored after a few minutes.

On the comments: I've noticed a lot of websites have got rid of the comments section, which I think is a shame. The comments on the Spectator's website used to be good but now they're gone. I know the Telegraph got rid of them a few months ago but brought them back because of a backlash by their readers. The Indo no longer allow comments either but I think that's to do with our defamation laws...

As long as your aware of how unreliable Breitbart is as a source. I wouldn't ban the daily mail but I also would never, ever quote it in ernest.

PlaneSpeeking

DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/special-reports/defining-irish-culture/

Apparently Louise is one of 25 people defining our culture. God help us all.

We're f***ed.

keano_afc

Irish culture is well and truly dead if that list is the barometer of what represents us.

JMNolan

DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/special-reports/defining-irish-culture/

Apparently Louise is one of 25 people defining our culture. God help us all.

I find RTE to be as biased as Fox news, Huffpo or Breitbart. There are some days I look at rte.ie and I honestly cant believe it's a news source.

DickSwiveller Returns

JMNolan wrote: »

I find RTE to be as biased as Fox news, Huffpo or Breitbart. There are some days I look at rte.ie and I honestly cant believe it's a news source.

My guess is it has to do with employing Millenials. The fact that there are much more women on the list tells you that the staff are very much members of the right on brigade

razorblunt

DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »

My guess is it has to do with employing Millenials. The fact that there are much more women on the list tells you that the staff are very much members of the right on brigade

Nah, it's been on going for years, it's a mates clubs.

RabbleRouser2k

razorblunt wrote: »

Nah, it's been on going for years, it's a mates clubs.

Have to agree-remember Amanda 'Friend of Bono' Brunker? Or Gavin 'Friend of Bono' Friday? Or Guggi 'Friend of....' yeah you get the picture.

Much of this is paid promotion-but I'd be surprised if many of those listed, like Louise O'Neill, aren't the only one's living at home with their parents or grandparents. I could name many, many more so-called influencers who can pay their rent, or own a house. Not on that list tho.

Many moons ago, The Sunday World listed Mary MacAleese as an 'icon' of Irish society, cos of one speech she made on the day of 9/11.... many people wouldn't be able to pick her out of a police lineup, never mind call her an 'icon'.

So yeah, take that RTe article with so much salt, you'll get dehydrated, or Gout.

pleas advice

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Brutefart and Halfpoo are bedfellows in my eyes.

good one, did you come up with those yourself?

razorblunt

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Have to agree-remember Amanda 'Friend of Bono' Brunker? Or Gavin 'Friend of Bono' Friday? Or Guggi 'Friend of....' yeah you get the picture.

Much of this is paid promotion-but I'd be surprised if many of those listed, like Louise O'Neill, aren't the only one's living at home with their parents or grandparents. I could name many, many more so-called influencers who can pay their rent, or own a house. Not on that list tho.

Many moons ago, The Sunday World listed Mary MacAleese as an 'icon' of Irish society, cos of one speech she made on the day of 9/11.... many people wouldn't be able to pick her out of a police lineup, never mind call her an 'icon'.

So yeah, take that RTe article with so much salt, you'll get dehydrated, or Gout.

Lottie Ryan is the epitome of this.

Finucane working for 90 mins a week.

Nicky Byrne being babysat on his radio show

etc etc

RabbleRouser2k

pleas advice wrote: »

good one, did you come up with those yourself?

I doubt it-I think John Oliver made some similar joke regarding Huffpo-this was when they introduced their 'video' channel-where they interviewed people. Trying to go from being a news paper to almost a 'network'.

RabbleRouser2k

razorblunt wrote: »

Lottie Ryan is the epitome of this.

Finucane working for 90 mins a week.

Nicky Byrne being babysat on his radio show

etc etc

Lottie keeps trying to 'break in'-but it's not happening.

Nicky Byrne showed his thin skin when his s**tty show was bashed around like a red-headed stepson. He started blaming the viewers for 'not being smart enough'. But RTe tried him on a quiz show pilot-and it died faster than Ray D'Arcy's dog show. The only one I pity on his radio show is Jenny Greene. She's worked her way up...to being a sidekick? What?

Finucane is a joke at this stage. You could hire an impersonator to do her job and get the same result. Far cheaper too.

p1akuw47h5r3it

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

I used to read huffington Post, before it became 'Huffpo'...ugh...

The H-Post used to allow people to comment on their pages, and all the other stuff. Then Trump won, they changed the site name to 'Huffpo', disabled all comment features, and now print articles that completely contradict one another.
They fired a reporter, unceremoniously, when he asked questions about Hillary Clinton's health in the run up to the election-no email, no 'we're terminating your contract' etc Just complete blanket delete of his account. Clinton's health became a major question, especially when she hid the fact she had been diagnosed with pneumonia-it lead to major questions regarding her other alleged health problems.

They had no problem printing an article where someone said a white American who was jailed in Korea for taking a banner would 'finally understand what it is like to be black, white privlege etc'. A year later, that same American was dead, and the article 'edited' but without the usual 'this article was updated at....'. Archive.is showed the original.
That reporter is still on the Huffpo books, but question the 'divine' Clintons, and you're fired...

Brutefart and Halfpoo are bedfellows in my eyes.

Sure they were both founded by Breitbart himself.

RabbleRouser2k

DanDan6592 wrote: »

Sure they were both founded by Breitbart himself.

Naw, they're just trying to stir up both sides against one another. Often with trumped up conspiracies.

Huffpo has thrown many's a 'Hillary lost because of sexism, Russia, Misogyny, ageism, feminism failed etc etc'...never look at how toxic her brand was, so much so that even aligning with the Ghostbusters with women movie killed both.

Then they also had the 'Donald Trump is a liar, a sexual harasser etc' tag on all articles related to him, and disabled comments.

Breitbart was peddling articles like 'Obama seeking a third term', 'Not born in America' etc.

It's similar bedfellows, just stoking folks against one another.

p1akuw47h5r3it

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Naw, they're just trying to stir up both sides against one another. Often with trumped up conspiracies.

Huffpo has thrown many's a 'Hillary lost because of sexism, Russia, Misogyny, ageism, feminism failed etc etc'...never look at how toxic her brand was, so much so that even aligning with the Ghostbusters with women movie killed both.

Then they also had the 'Donald Trump is a liar, a sexual harasser etc' tag on all articles related to him, and disabled comments.

Breitbart was peddling articles like 'Obama seeking a third term', 'Not born in America' etc.

It's similar bedfellows, just stoking folks against one another.

I know they are just both opposite sides of the same coin, but they were both founded by Andrew Breitbart, in the Huffington Post's case along with Ariana Huffington. He said in his autobiography that he set it up to show how nuts the left was or something to that accord.

kunst nugget

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Many moons ago, The Sunday World listed Mary MacAleese as an 'icon' of Irish society, cos of one speech she made on the day of 9/11.... many people wouldn't be able to pick her out of a police lineup, never mind call her an 'icon'.

Two term Irish President Mary McAleese, who was re-elected unopposed because no one was willing to go up against her based on her popularity?

RabbleRouser2k

kunst nugget wrote: »

Two term Irish President Mary McAleese, who was re-elected unopposed because no one was willing to go up against her based on her popularity?

You forget they did-Dana tried to run against her, but she couldn't get the support. She was running as an independent, and I don't know the methods required, but she needed two parties to offer support to help her run in the campaign.

She couldn't get em. It was more that people, party political folks, didn't want to endure a campaign.

She wasn't as popular as Mary Robinson, for example.

kunst nugget

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

You forget they did-Dana tried to run against her, but she couldn't get the support. She was running as an independent, and I don't know the methods required, but she needed two parties to offer support to help her run in the campaign.

She couldn't get em. It was more that people, party political folks, didn't want to endure a campaign.

She wasn't as popular as Mary Robinson, for example.

She left the office more popular than Mary Robinson, who annoyed many by resigning two months early from presidency. Factor in everything she's done to help combat sectarianism on this island by promoting positive relations in both sides of the border in the eagle if the Good Friday Agreement and I think you could make a pretty good argument for her being an icon in this country. She's extremely well known in Ireland. I don't know why you think people wouldn't be able to pick her out in a police line up.

DickSwiveller Returns

kunst nugget wrote: »

She left the office more popular than Mary Robinson, who annoyed many by resigning two months early from presidency. Factor in everything she's done to help combat sectarianism on this island by promoting positive relations in both sides of the border in the eagle if the Good Friday Agreement and I think you could make a pretty good argument for her being an icon in this country. She's extremely well known in Ireland. I don't know why you think people wouldn't be able to pick her out in a police line up.

Not sure. The media and D4 crowd love her because she's always bashing the Church but I wouldn't say she is an icon to many people.

RabbleRouser2k

kunst nugget wrote: »

She left the office more popular than Mary Robinson, who annoyed many by resigning two months early from presidency. Factor in everything she's done to help combat sectarianism on this island by promoting positive relations in both sides of the border in the eagle if the Good Friday Agreement and I think you could make a pretty good argument for her being an icon in this country. She's extremely well known in Ireland. I don't know why you think people wouldn't be able to pick her out in a police line up.

Yes-but Robinson did so with good reason. Humanitarian efforts at home and abroad.

I don't think you understand the word 'icon'. Elvis is an Icon-most people outside of and inside of Ireland know who he was. Ditto Obama, Columbo, Mickey Mouse, Superman etc That's what 'icon' means. And that's why the Sunday World calling her an 'icon' was a misuse of the word. Icon's don't exist within a small isolated area. One could call the local butcher an icon if that was the case. (No mocking of butchers, mind. Just an example).

Ask an American, or a UK citizen who she is-you'd be met with blank stares, for the most part. Similar happened to David Beckham around the same as the article I mentioned. He was touted as the 'number one UK icon'. Yet this was long before he ever moved to the USA. Many within the US hadn't a clue who he was.

DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »

Not sure. The media and D4 crowd love her because she's always bashing the Church but I wouldn't say she is an icon to many people.

Yes, many wouldn't know who she is or was. Nor would they care. Bashing the church is like something the cool kids do to get noticed in Irish media.
It's an easy target, which it set itself up to be, frankly. So now it's like a singer singing his only hit, over, and over again.

kunst nugget

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Yes, many wouldn't know who she is or was. Nor would they care. Bashing the church is like something the cool kids do to get noticed in Irish media.
It's an easy target, which it set itself up to be, frankly. So now it's like a singer singing his only hit, over, and over again.

You think McAleese is just trying to be one of the cool kids just to get noticed in the Irish media? She's written a book on Canon Law ffs and is doing a doctorate in the subject to help advocate for those that don't have a choice in the church. She might be a vocal critic of the church but she's an in-depth knowledge of what she's actually talking about.

RabbleRouser2k

kunst nugget wrote: »

You think McAleese is just trying to be one of the cool kids just to get noticed in the Irish media? She's written a book on Canon Law ffs and is doing a doctorate in the subject to help advocate for those that don't have a choice in the church. She might be a vocal critic of the church but she's an in-depth knowledge of what she's actually talking about.

You keep picking out points I make in subsequent posts, but ignore the ones I address in previous posts. Okay, that's your prerogative...

I'm just noting that there's nothing 'relevant' about bashing the church-it's the lazy go to way of getting into the newspapers.
Like watching a musician on their 'final ever' tour. Or the Edgelord trying to stay edgy.
And most people don't care about the church anymore... so her bringing it up is to make herself seem relevant. She's a former journo, she knows what she's doing.

kunst nugget

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

You keep picking out points I make in subsequent posts, but ignore the ones I address in previous posts. Okay, that's your prerogative...

I'm just noting that there's nothing 'relevant' about bashing the church-it's the lazy go to way of getting into the newspapers.
Like watching a musician on their 'final ever' tour. Or the Edgelord trying to stay edgy.
And most people don't care about the church anymore... so her bringing it up is to make herself seem relevant. She's a former journo, she knows what she's doing.

You said that the Sunday World had Mary McAleese listed as an icon of 'Irish society' which I would be think she would, whether you agree with her views or not. I think most people in Ireland would know who Mary McAleese is despite what you said. You then shifted the goalposts by saying being an icon is an international thing like Elvis or Mickey Mouse. That wasn't what I would have though being an 'icon of Irish society' would have meant so I think we've ended up at cross purposes on the topic so I didn't see the point of continuing the conversation.

She's a former journalist but she's also a former professor of Criminal Law in Trinity and Pro-Vice-Chancellor of Queen's University who moved to Rome after her Presidency to study Canon Law. I don't care about the Church anymore, you probably don't either but she seems to care deeply about it. She cares enough to devote several years of her life to study to help advocate for those, like her gay son, that she feels aren't represented by the church. To me, it's tilting at windmills because she's never going to be able to change it but I'd admire that the passion and personal commitment she has made and to accuse her of doing it for likes or to be cool is being incredibly reductive and petty.