The meaww.com website (which is the source of my skinny girl cancel story) is out of India and is one of the top 500 websites in the world in pageviews according to traffic monitors. The meaaw.com website is owned by Eleven Internet Services LLP and is primarily focused on "entertainment news". It is not associated with Ken LaCorte. https://www.prnewswire.com/in/news-...-top-500-websites-in-the-world-585790691.html
https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/sputniknews.com#section_traffic https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/meaww.com#section_traffic https://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/zerohedge.com#section_traffic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip...d generally,likely to constitute undue weight.
45,000 in a world of 4-5 billion people with access is the same as two bitches on the street corner faking outrage.
I never said the meaaw.com was reliable. I stated it was an "entertainment news" site. They are focused on "gossipy" types of "news". Let's make the primary point once again... the meaaw.com website is not associated with Ken LaCorte -- despite your apparent attempt to tie it to him somehow.
I did not attempt to tie anything, I pointed to how trolls get clicks w/outrage news drawing an analogy, I posted a WaPo story about how this online tabloid was sued for being garbage as an addendum. Listen, I could start an online petition to cancel xyz person, means fuck all.
Raising a mob on the internet to cancel someone no longer "means fuck all". "Cancel Culture" has gone too far. It is no longer merely entertainment -- it is now directly impacting people's jobs, lives, and reputations on the basis of usually false (or questionable) information spread on the internet... or on the basis on something the person stated years ago while ignoring the context & content of the rest of their work.
Go read the New Yorker story on dark money and the election reform bill if you want to learn how you're being played with "cancel culture" outrage. I'm GOP PAC, I start petition, I hire click farm, I feed outrage culture to garbage outlet in India.
Is this the article you mean - https://www.newyorker.com/news/news...argest-election-reform-bill-in-half-a-century The New Yorker story does not deal with Cancel Culture -- the only time the term is mentioned is in reference to outlining "Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez achieve her goal of holding “people in the Trump Administration accountable” by identifying big donors" as a form of cancel culture in attempting to cancel conservative voices. Of course, AOC thinks its perfectly acceptable to raise lots of money for her progressive causes without providing a single dime to the Democratic party. Many Democratic politicians want to cancel her progressive fund raising which is used to primary moderate Democrats. Do you consider this Cancel Culture as well.
You're missing my point, this single leaked call of a single big donor exploration tried to float "cancel culture" as a way to push back against HR1's dark money donor disclosure provisions. You really think this is the only call by operatives and the Kochs' the only big donors exploring that angle? Why's "cancel culture" suddenly the big story? “to see if we could find any message that would activate and persuade conservatives on this issue.” He related that “an A.O.C. message we tested”—one claiming that the bill might help Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez achieve her goal of holding “people in the Trump Administration accountable” by identifying big donors—helped somewhat with conservatives. But McKenzie admitted that the link was tenuous, since “what she means by this is unclear.” “Sadly,” he added, not even attaching the phrase “cancel culture” to the bill, by portraying it as silencing conservative voices, had worked. “It really ranked at the bottom,” McKenzie said to the group. “That was definitely a little concerning for us.”