Basically trying to nostalgia bait people but buddy saw right through it and went in for the kill.
this post was submitted on 25 Feb 2026
1134 points (99.5% liked)
Funny
13929 readers
1524 users here now
General rules:
- Be kind.
- All posts must make an attempt to be funny.
- Obey the general sh.itjust.works instance rules.
- No politics or political figures. There are plenty of other politics communities to choose from.
- Don't post anything grotesque or potentially illegal. Examples include pornography, gore, animal cruelty, inappropriate jokes involving kids, etc.
Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I wonder what New York would have been if Henry George had become mayor back then
-"Snow is pretty"
-"Mmhmm, so private equity owns..."
A+ for staying on message.
They did streisand this effect very nicely without even trying.
Sounds like NBC needs to study and read socialist theory. Seriously! https://redsails.org/
They probably did, but decided to pick the side of the billionaire class/got told by their owners (the billionaire class) that they were to pick the side of the billionaire class in order to facilitate the continued exploitation of ordinary people
Gee, would've been a shame if NBC gets split and then to the workers who would then collectivize it. Seriously!
Can someone federate it?
Here is a tweet https://t.co/gUEj8HeHkF of the loops,video clip that is linked in this page https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/legend-yorker-turns-local-news-210000274.html
As unhinged as social media gets, this is pretty much why so many end up trusting it over traditional media. The internet broke the veil of commercial reporting/journalism - media in general. Broke the trust on accepting public personas and not being suspicious of them behind the scenes. Sell out reporters/journalist/artists/etc are like scabs to labor strikers
She was trying to do a fluff piece interview, and he was trying to drop hard facts. I'm glad he didn't back down on his points.
Haven't watched it but sounds like someone with strong convictions and an idea why things are the way they are. Hopefully eventually enough people recognize the fact that we need a functional society that allows the random person to feel comfortable. Cause if you get enough itchy people things get scratched.
And this is why legacy media is legacy media.
She pulled back the microphone mid sentence when he refused to let the conversation get derailed.
Very sus
Crazy how fast she pulled back on that. Like she has been trained to not allow that sort of talk. It was almost instant.
From 
to 
in an instant!
A dog watching another dog bote the hand that feeds her.
It really makes you wonder how these reporters are trained. What else can they not talk about on air?
Anything that goes against the values of Sinclair or NexStar would be off the table.
So general common sense like fuck ICE and free Palestine?
Pretty much everything that isn't on their script, IIRC.
The news reporter wanted a feel good puff piece regardless of how inappropriate it is. The interviewee wanted to report the actual news.
Was it live? Probably not. That means they left it in on purpose.
Did you watch the clip?
Yes. But if they aired it, they aired it on purpose. Clips like that are rarely actually live. So they made a show of not continuing to give him airtime, but they gave him enough to get his message out - twice.
The company that owns that NBC affiliate wanted a feel good puff piece. I doubt she had a say in the matter.
Yeah, she's just following orders.
load more comments
(5 replies)
Can't let people say the truth, it would inconvenience your masters.
She knows exactly what she is doing. She probably wouldn't even get into any trouble if she had let the guy go on for a bit since it is just a random, live interview. Doesn't matter, though, as boot-fellating, spittle-licking toadies will instantly and hungrily provide cover for the owner class. There will always be a critical mass of just about every demographic (even those you would not expect it from) who will be willing to sell out for that payday. If she doesn't try to silence or steamroll any even remotely anti-greed rhetoric she might be passed over for that next promotion.
Shout out to Washington Heights. I used to live at Fort Washington and 181st. I miss it.
If the fediverse can focus on integrating content from from other fediverse sources extremely organically, the fediverse will win. I shouldn't have to leave Lemmy to watch this video.
Huh? I watched it in the app (Jerboa) and it was no problem, I downloaded it too, and sync'd to my immich server, of course 🤓
You need to leave? I could just watch it on the timeline. Using jerboa, I guess it depends on client.
Woah, I've been on Eternity for quite a while and have heard about Jerboa a bunch in comments! Finally downloaded it based on this comment and sure enough, this video was the first thing in my feed and it even auto played silently on the thumbnail! (Turning that off immediately though lol)
Thanks for the recommend!! ❤️
load more comments
(1 replies)
It's embedded for me ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
load more comments
(9 replies)
This guy is my hero
lol I love that guy, he definitely like "oh ya, it's my time, I'm over this shit, but I'll be polite about it"
she smiles like the woman from ba sing se,
the back in the 90s part screams body language of desperation to signal to him to play along and say what she wants him to say.
To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.
Careful with that quote, it's by Kevin Alfred Strom a Neo-Nazi from an 1993 essay in the national Vanguard, a white nationalist publication and it refers to the antisemitic trope of world Judaism.
I'm not criticizing you, just want to contextualize it because it could be misconstrued to be a antisemitic dog-whistle, especially in the context of the linked article.
It's an axiomatic truism. It's logic is self contained.
To learn who is wet, simply find out who is in the water.
Is it? I haven't studied philosophy (but I have studied math) - it seems to me that the Wikipedia article on Truism demands the statement to be true for it to be a truism. But it's not true though?
The way I see it, the statement can be construed as:
I'm not allowed to criticize X -> X rules over me
But, perhaps because "allowed" and "criticize" are subject to interpretation, there are plenty of groups you will be socially penalized for criticizing (see jokes about kids with cancer below the comment with the quote - I can’t figure out how to link to them). Many countries also protect minorities by making hate speech illegal, and yet those minorities are not ruling the country (though that's probably exactly what the quote was originally meant to imply). If anything, the truism would be the 'opposite' implication:
X rules over me -> I'm not allowed to criticize X
Yet even this isn't categorically true, like in democracies (which I guess brings in the interpretation of "rule", as well).
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
They better never interview me on live TV. Ill be asking the reporter where they will be hiding when the revolution comes.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›