I mean, yes, but they're minimal. They don't charge enough for a subscription to fully cover their revenues. Plus serving ads has always been something news outlets have done for revenue.
But hey, if they can just fuck off, I guess we can maintain either ads all over the page or let Sinclair/Newscorp run everything.
The issue isn't data transmission and hosting, it's paying someone a living wage to do this work professionally, along with their editors, graphic artists, analysts, and everyone else along the way that writes the news. It's a bit absurd that people complain about ads and low quality reporting/analysis while simultaneously demanding all journalists work for free. Hell, if you get a library card you'll probably be able to legitimately access the article right now for free in a way that still pays the journalist.
Probably a rosé then.
It's very common for teens to be impulsive and reckless because they're basically biologically programmed to be so. It's not something they can control, really, it's something they're experiencing. If you didn't go through that, it's all good, probably safer frankly, but it's not like people are aberrant for being reckless while maturing.
*Porkins
What the actual fuck are you talking about. The Japanese literally used suicide attacks and were so brainwashed they believed suicide was preferable to enemy capture. The Germans literally committed the multiple genocides. They were rehabilitated over time but it took time and effort. Both committed horrific atrocities, yet through international effort, are largely reformed.
Fun fact: she's Mitt Romney's niece. He once put her in a binder.
I'd like to note that in this situation where you've expressed you don't like either major party, you only believe one of those parties should reform the situation (Democratic), which means that inherently you know one is acting more in good faith than the other. I doubt it even occurred to you that a Republican would want to reform the FPTP process because you know they won't do it and have no incentive to.
If you implictly know that there's a lesser of two evils and yet choose to vote third party in the general, it's just as much on you when the worse of the two evils wins.
You really need to read up on American history.
Because it's not about the amount of money or the ability to fight it, it's about the way the income or other wealth was generated. The IRS audits the rich all the time, it's just easier to have someone fix a mistake or catch tax evasion/fraud when the underlying income/wealth is only generated from a few sources. If you make 7 figures because that's your salary, it's still pretty easy to audit you.
Not really, that's a minor part of the opinion. The more important part is they tell you how much food you're going to get of what kind and then they give you that food. I don't think anyone would be able to win a case on "my burger didn't look like the burger in the ad" because every burger looks a little different. Lots of things that are the same don't look the same and let's not suddenly pretend we get McDonalds for the appearance. They'd win false advertising if, say, a quarter pounder was only 2 oz.
Agreed. I'm friends with a few journalists and even the ones who had a steady job at major outlets were working it like a hustle. There really isn't a good way to do it that doesn't involve some level of either corporate or wide-public investment and both of those have an easy chance to get corrupted.