This is what I meant. It's an aggregator whose primary function is not to relay news but to draw people into microsoftland and/or advertise to them. To be sure, other news sites do this too, but they actually have journalists and editors and therefore (at least the pretense of) journalistic integrity.

[–] mulcahey@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

It's just reposting ABC News if that matters

[–] DarkNightoftheSoul@mander.xyz 3 points 9 months ago

It doesn't. I found the same news several times over elsewhere, covered in more detail. I appreciate the sentiment though, thank you.

[–] pancake@lemmygrad.ml 10 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I wonder what the writings were, although I'm cautious on believing that they were antisemitic, since hating Jews and hating Israel have historically been opposing positions expressed by two widely different demographics, and now that division is clearer than ever.

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 3 points 8 months ago

Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, and Saturday are dead men walking.

[–] Flyberius@hexbear.net 10 points 9 months ago

Sure.

[–] BassaForte@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago

Well that definitely isn't sus

[–] PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml 7 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Yea I bet the shooter was "antisemitic," for sure.

[–] Tinidril@midwest.social 11 points 9 months ago

Actual antisemitism is still a thing, and pretty common with the kind of people that would commit this kind of crime. It's a real shame that the term has been made almost useless by applying it to anyone with a principled stance against genocide.

[–] OgdenTO@hexbear.net 5 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I doubt it

[–] flying_sheep@lemmy.ml 3 points 9 months ago

Why?

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 3 points 9 months ago (2 children)

A story that's interesting from a gun crime perspective. Stopped by two good guys with guns (but did they accidentally hit the shooter's child?), and the crime was committed with a gun purchased legally. It's got elements of both sides of the gun law debate, lol

[–] mulcahey@lemmy.world 8 points 9 months ago

Eh, "Good thing we had dangling pianos to drop on the guy who's been cutting all the cords on our dangling pianos" isn't quite a strong argument for the pro-dangling pianos side

[–] racoon@lemmy.ml 1 points 9 months ago

What debate? Why can such a thing as a debate exist? You’ve got a conflict of interest between children’s public health and corporate profit and we know which side is winning. Public health can’t be measured in economic terms because we lack a children’s market