▲ 479 ▼ Mia Khalifa fired from Playboy for her pro-Hamas posts after the Israel attack (www.businesstoday.in) submitted 2 years ago by vis4valentine@lemmy.ml to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world 244 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] i_ben_fine@lemmy.one 18 points 2 years ago (1 child) So... she didn't say that. Those words are very different. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] CaptPretentious@lemmy.world -6 points 2 years ago (1 child) Well, that's your choice to side with her on that. A lot of people are interpreting it as 1) a terrible time to try to be funny and 2) can easily be interpreted as support for Hamas, until she got a ton of backlash and it started to cost her money and then she 'totes didn't mean it that way, just a prank, for realz!' permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] xad@lemmy.ml 31 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) It really is a choice to claim someone said something which they did not actually say at all. Saying "they said x and I think they meant y" is entirely different from claiming "they said y" while knowing they in fact said x. This is not controversial. Interpretations are fine, actively crafting disinformation is not. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] SoleInvictus@lemmy.world -7 points 2 years ago* (2 children) That was her mistake - the comment was too vague, so the media jumped on it, skewed the narrative, took that skewed narrative and grossly exaggerated it further, and denounced her as pro-Hamas. It's obvious to see with even a little bit of reading and it's both frightening and disgusting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] atetulo@lemm.ee 10 points 2 years ago (1 child) Uhh, no. It was not her mistake that biased media outlets with an agenda say she said something while not actually reporting the exact thing she said. It's bad journalism, but I don't think anyone expects reputable journalists to take this matter seriously. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Yeah, I see your point and I agree. permalink fedilink source parent [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago No, that one comment was not vague, the only active "fighters" to be called "freedom fighters" were Hamas. There is no ambiguity, no vagueness. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] CaptPretentious@lemmy.world -6 points 2 years ago (1 child) Well, that's your choice to side with her on that. A lot of people are interpreting it as 1) a terrible time to try to be funny and 2) can easily be interpreted as support for Hamas, until she got a ton of backlash and it started to cost her money and then she 'totes didn't mean it that way, just a prank, for realz!' permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] xad@lemmy.ml 31 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) It really is a choice to claim someone said something which they did not actually say at all. Saying "they said x and I think they meant y" is entirely different from claiming "they said y" while knowing they in fact said x. This is not controversial. Interpretations are fine, actively crafting disinformation is not. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] SoleInvictus@lemmy.world -7 points 2 years ago* (2 children) That was her mistake - the comment was too vague, so the media jumped on it, skewed the narrative, took that skewed narrative and grossly exaggerated it further, and denounced her as pro-Hamas. It's obvious to see with even a little bit of reading and it's both frightening and disgusting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] atetulo@lemm.ee 10 points 2 years ago (1 child) Uhh, no. It was not her mistake that biased media outlets with an agenda say she said something while not actually reporting the exact thing she said. It's bad journalism, but I don't think anyone expects reputable journalists to take this matter seriously. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Yeah, I see your point and I agree. permalink fedilink source parent [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago No, that one comment was not vague, the only active "fighters" to be called "freedom fighters" were Hamas. There is no ambiguity, no vagueness. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] xad@lemmy.ml 31 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child) It really is a choice to claim someone said something which they did not actually say at all. Saying "they said x and I think they meant y" is entirely different from claiming "they said y" while knowing they in fact said x. This is not controversial. Interpretations are fine, actively crafting disinformation is not. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] SoleInvictus@lemmy.world -7 points 2 years ago* (2 children) That was her mistake - the comment was too vague, so the media jumped on it, skewed the narrative, took that skewed narrative and grossly exaggerated it further, and denounced her as pro-Hamas. It's obvious to see with even a little bit of reading and it's both frightening and disgusting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] atetulo@lemm.ee 10 points 2 years ago (1 child) Uhh, no. It was not her mistake that biased media outlets with an agenda say she said something while not actually reporting the exact thing she said. It's bad journalism, but I don't think anyone expects reputable journalists to take this matter seriously. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Yeah, I see your point and I agree. permalink fedilink source parent [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago No, that one comment was not vague, the only active "fighters" to be called "freedom fighters" were Hamas. There is no ambiguity, no vagueness. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] SoleInvictus@lemmy.world -7 points 2 years ago* (2 children) That was her mistake - the comment was too vague, so the media jumped on it, skewed the narrative, took that skewed narrative and grossly exaggerated it further, and denounced her as pro-Hamas. It's obvious to see with even a little bit of reading and it's both frightening and disgusting. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] atetulo@lemm.ee 10 points 2 years ago (1 child) Uhh, no. It was not her mistake that biased media outlets with an agenda say she said something while not actually reporting the exact thing she said. It's bad journalism, but I don't think anyone expects reputable journalists to take this matter seriously. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Yeah, I see your point and I agree. permalink fedilink source parent [–] jj4211@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago No, that one comment was not vague, the only active "fighters" to be called "freedom fighters" were Hamas. There is no ambiguity, no vagueness. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] atetulo@lemm.ee 10 points 2 years ago (1 child) Uhh, no. It was not her mistake that biased media outlets with an agenda say she said something while not actually reporting the exact thing she said. It's bad journalism, but I don't think anyone expects reputable journalists to take this matter seriously. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Yeah, I see your point and I agree. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SoleInvictus@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Yeah, I see your point and I agree. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago No, that one comment was not vague, the only active "fighters" to be called "freedom fighters" were Hamas. There is no ambiguity, no vagueness. permalink fedilink source parent