The thing that kills me with articles that might otherwise be on point is that they often say things matter-of-factly that are, at least, up for debate (if not downright false). For instance, in the second article:
That’s not to say you should shed a tear for Parler, whose “free speech” mantra is often just a veneer for hate…
Just a veneer for hate? Are they trying to say Parler had some purpose around promoting hate?
Reality is: People are hateful. If you give people true, free speech (a principle this country was founded on), there will say hateful things. On the left. On the right.
But, if never read anything with a prejudicial comment like that, I would never read anything. 🙂
Happy Friday everyone. No hate for you from me, even if you disagree 100% with me. 🙂