this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2024
163 points (94.5% liked)

politics

19159 readers
4474 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Time to get some coffee and doughnuts

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 93 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (3 children)

They are acting like Dunkin made demands of the platform and tried to secretly influence them to censor their right wing podcasts. They didn't. Rumble reached out to Dunkin, at least twice it seems, begging for ad dollars, and they said "no". They gave an honest, fair and reasonable justification, that they didn't want their non-political national brand associated with extremely politically decisive right wing media, but said that if they change they will reconsider in the future. The right are butthurt because they are seen as bad for normal national brands to be associated with, which of course makes those brands evil woke brands.

This is a literal 1:1 analog of a dude constantly asking out a girl, and she says that she doesn't date men who wear MAGA hats and fly Confederate flags on their truck because it wouldn't sit well with her friends and family, but she's open to dating him if he ever stops those things. And so he calls her a stuck-up woke bitch who only fucks soyboys and wouldn't know a real man if she saw it. And then he blasts her on social media and all of his friends decide to harass her and try to get her fired from her job. It is literal the EXACT SAME THING AS THAT.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

they didn't want their non-political national brand associated with extremely politically decisive right wing media

Worth noting: Dunkin is owned by Inspire Brands, who went out of their way to toot their own horn about how they were successful in lobbying to kill inclusion of a minimum wage hike as part of COVID relief:

https://www.newsweek.com/this-fast-food-giant-bragged-about-killing-15-minimum-wage-1579273

So they're perfectly happy to take political positions; they just recognize these platforms are even more radioactive than bragging about opposing living wages for their workers.

Further, Inspire is owned by Roark Capital -- a company literally named after an Ayn Rand character. That's how far out in the loonie bin these folks are. And the MAGAs are too far over the line even for them, lol.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

So they’re perfectly happy to take political positions

That was quite the dick move, but genuinely asking: why is that move considered political? I'd say it's an evil corporatism move.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

You're right there. It's got fuck all to do with politics and everything to do with squeezing as much money out of their run on this planet. Also the reason they won't take certain political positions but easily do so when it might lead to more profits.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

why is that move considered political?

Political lobbying is kind of inherently political, no? They weren't passive observers or commentators; they hired lobbyists to influence the legislative outcome.

Actively working to shape the legal structure of the country to better suit their company is politics. It's different from culture war politics, but it's still politics.

If anything, economic politics are what traditionally drove a lot of the political divide in this country. That's taken a back seat to a degree, but it hasn't made it not political.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

You're right. If they used our political system for their benefit, then yes, it was a political move.

[–] rc__buggy 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Smells like bullshit to me. Why would an ad agent give an explanation of rejection to a request for advertising? Do they do this? If so, why do they do this?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago

Wouldn't shock me if they just got turned down without explanation and the dude decided to put words into their mouths as to why. Either way, though, it doesn't make Dunkin look bad. It just makes their reaction look bad.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

Leave it to the right to select a centralized, javascript-addled, Google-tagged abomination as a platform. World's smallest violin when they inevitably get censored in some capacity.