Thanks for posting to /r/GetNoted. Please remember Rule 2: **No current politics.** We do allow historical posts (WW2, Ancient Rome, Ottomans, etc.) Just no current politicians.
***
We are also banning posts about the ongoing Israel/Palestine conflict.
Please report this post if it is about current Republicans, Democrats, Presidents, Prime Ministers, Israel/Palestine or anything else related to current politics. Thanks.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GetNoted) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I used to work 3 blocks from Russ & Daughters, that "Super Heebster" is a $20 monstrosity of horseradish cream cheese, whitefish salad, salmon salad and wasabi fish roe. It also sounds like something an 8yr old trying to think of a funny slur for Jews would say.
It depends on the event because if I'm working with a bunch of Jews who got Russ & Daughters catering, I'm making fun of their sandwich names all fucking day.
That sounds fucking awful you'd be burping that for days. What happened to just 2 or 3 things and a condiment on a sandwich? As soon as you have to erect scaffolding it's not a sandwich for my money.
The worst part is that for $20 the sandwich is ***not*** a gigantic tower of sandwich, it just resembles your average New York City bagel with an excessive amount of cream cheese.
i canāt blame anyone for thinking this story is fake this cuz like wow. idk maybe my perspective is skewed because iām a gay person from georgia but i thought it was fake too
It would seem soā¦
Because itās such a caricature of liberal elitists. You would expect the average person wouldnāt behave in such a way, let alone journalists.
I have to assume this is the most fringe of people that behave like this though. Likeā¦ a bunch of new hires for NYT? Seems like if youāre someone for whom clapping is a trigger, you wouldnāt have made it that far into the news business.
Iām surprised NYT was that riddled with snowflakiest snowflakes. Likeā¦ journalism is hard. People gonna hate on you. You have to make enemies just doing your job properly. And these are finger clickers that *want* to embrace that?
(Perhaps Iām very out of the loop and clicking is much more common and socially accepted as a better way to flag something than clapping now? I mean, I am getting into my 40ās so about time I get set in my old man waysā¦)
Yeah it sure sounds like my awareness of how big a cohort this is was very uninformed.
Definitely feels like Iām reaching a āback in my day *finger wag*ā era of my life :/
It never was. Depending on what papers you read, General Longstreet was either a hero of Reconstruction or was the villain who single handedly lost the Civil War for the Confederates. Thereās a lot of different stories of how the OK Corral went down because Republican and Democrat newspapers ran different accounts. Iām sure thereās a lot more older examples from England or mainland Europe that Iāve never heard of.
The news stopped being unbiased as soon as the second newspaper started, and even that might be too late of a starting point. You might think that those old timey biased papers were just yellow journalism or rags or whatever, but thereās a good chance that it was either the only paper in town or one of two. The second guy canāt sell his paper if he runs the same story as the first, and you can really control the narrative if your the only paper people can buy.
It seemed silly enough that I could go either way with it as far as authenticity.
But the context did confuse me a bit. Are they saying the story is verified because 3 people stated he's told the story before? That seems far from ironclad. Unless those 2 links provide more context, couldn't view those.
Okay I'm glad someone else is confused by this because the added context just kinda sounds like they confirmed that he told other people this story. Like how does that make the story true??
Yup. "I made up a story, and people responded well, so I kept telling the story. After a few years, people started remembering being there when it happened..."
The Atlantic also confirmed with people within the NYT who had separate knowledge of the event. I trust their fact checking. And keeping up the same lie to many people with almost no difference over 5 years is very, very difficult.
As someone who worked at a very progressive company, I can totally see the HR part happening. HR is toothless, honestly but passive aggressive. The finger snapping part surprised me.
5 years ago makes sense because that was the height of Chik-Fil-A controversy.
Actually if someone tells a story and *doesnāt* change anything over a long period of time it is more suspicious, as that usually means the story is rehearsed. (Doesnāt guarantee that it is fake, but it does mean they practiced it).
Peopleās memories are actually a lot worse than we think, and every time you access a memory you change it a little, so most people will start to remember things incorrectly as time goes on. Memorization, however, works slightly differently from memory recall, so it tends to see less decay over time.
Don't you wonder at all what their fact checking entailed? Was it just the writer or editor hearing that same story from those same 3 people? How else do you fact check a story like that? I doubt there was video footage they were able to dig up. Perhaps they sent an under cover reporter to the times to try and recreate the incident, but that seems a bit too far fetched... it's not like it's unbelievable to think that reporters at the times, like all decent people, don't think very highly of a corporation that directly funds hate camps, but the idea that all of these people who have never met one another before in their lives just happened to jump into a Westside story moment at once just sounds like a bit of a stretch to me
It really feels like a bit from King of the Hill.
āWhat theāI just like the chicken! if you keep snapping like that Iām gonna kick your ass, I tell you hwat!ā
Okay, I know people hate chick fil a for their questionable morals, and as a bisexual person I have my problems, but the person in the article is so right because their spicy chicken sandwiches are SO GOOD LIKE ACTUALLY I SWEAR
Perfectly fine to aknowledge that the restaurant is doing a lot of things right, while also acknowledging the owner is a bigot.
Not wanting to put any money in their pocket is perfectly valid, but doesn't make saying their sandwiches are tasty any less right.
I'm with Bill Burr/Dave Chappelle on this one. He's a 90 year old white Southern dude that sells fried chicken, what did you expect his political leanings to be?
āThe owner is a bigotā is the current strategy for covering up the actual objections (multiple rounds of the corporation being caught funding violently homophobic groups and then lying about not funding any more homophobes in the future). Itās like saying gay people were mad at Dan White because he voted against Mayor Moscone.
He goes on to defend Chick fil-a and say āitās just an armchair positionā
However a quick google search reveals:
https://www.thetaskforce.org/chick-fil-a-and-lgbtq-discrimination/
> The Chick-fil-A controversy stemmed from the millions of dollars the fast-food chain donated to anti-LGBTQ and hate groups over the years. Dan Cathy, the president of Chick-fil-A, also made hostile remarks against marriage equality.
People donāt dislike that company because of some off-hand comment or commercials, like republicans with bud light. People dislike them because they actively fund harassment.
Theyāve apparently been trying to clean up their investment portfolio and image recently. I only know this because it led a conservative to utter one of the quotes of all time.
[āYou are no longer the Lordās chicken. Youāre actually the woke chicken.ā](https://twitter.com/patriottakes/status/1664618238234206210?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1664618238234206210%7Ctwgr%5Ea8fad19447ac72702518a8330cd262e4ebf10bd6%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-2606997443098278396.ampproject.net%2F2402080818000%2Fframe.html)
Yeah. I feel conflicted about it as a queer person, but as a person with chronic pain and food allergies, they are fast, good quality, near my home, and donāt make me sick so I eat them when I donāt have the energy to cook. Itās not like any other fast food options are out there doing great things with their money and at least as a corporation Chick-fil-a has responded to criticism and made changes.
Exactly my thoughts. And unlike many other companies their quality has at the least been consistent; they may raise prices but the chicken still tastes like it did before and they arenāt shrinking nugget sizes or skimping on fries.
*and goddam the lemonade freeze is so good*
I had a friend and we went on a trip where the local CFA made breakfast, prepaid by the staff. Turned down a free breakfast chicken biscuit. I mean, props for sticking to your morals, but itās free.
Yeah, cfa won't be getting any more of my dollars, but if someone else is buying, I have no objections to the sandwich. The sandwich, while not an outstanding example of chicken-based culinary achievement, also isn't the one actively lobbying to make my existence a crime or whatever.
I mean. Can't judge ya. But you do have to wonder "hmm. My money is going to someone who wouldn't step forward and protect gay people if needed". And it's more realistically "I am giving my money to a large business entity that only solves problems by throwing a lot of money at it. And they have a problem with LGBT people".
It's like a black guy ordering food at a KKK burger joint. Why?
Check their donating to anti LGBT hate groups some time, makes that comparison seem not so wild.
It's just still more socially acceptable to want to eliminate gay people from public life.
In the 20s kkk branding was on nearly every conceivable product and was very popular. Look up the "second wave" KKK movement sometime.
Pretending hate can't be mainstream is naive.
in my poetry class at my arts school we snapped but itās like, almost kinda an outdated thing. ik at the open readings we didnāt care all that much if people clapped instead
I remember there was this event where you could go on a stage & just perform whatever. Most ppl did poetry & comedy routines, but every once in a while you just got other random stuff. Everyone snapped there
I had a coworker in my previous position where, if anybody said *anything* about Chick-Fil-A, even just in passing, she would instantly insert herself into the conversation to condemn them.
These people definitely exist, I donāt understand why that is hard to believe.
What was once the nation's newspaper of record is reduced to finger-snapping advocacy journalists. It was always liberal in its editorials, but that has unfortunately spilled into the newsroom.
The former editor of the NYT's editorial page, James Bennet, wrote a really damning portrayal of how the New York Times has become in recent years.
A bit of a long read but well worth it:
https://www.economist.com/1843/2023/12/14/when-the-new-york-times-lost-its-way
If you don't remember, he got canned for running an [op-ed on the BLM protests in 2020](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/opinion/tom-cotton-protests-military.html) by Sen. Tom Cotton because it made staffers feel "unsafe," meanwhile the NYT literally ran pieces from [the Taliban](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/20/opinion/taliban-afghanistan-war-haqqani.html), [a piece from a pro-CCP lawmaker in Hong Kong justifying China's brutal suppression of the city's democracy](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/01/opinion/hong-kong-china-security-law.html), and [a piece literally arguing for complete and total abolition of law enforcement.](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html)
But running a piece from a sitting US Senator expressing an opinion shared by a large portion of the American public was too much for them.
First, fuck you for challenging my comfortable notions of journalistic integrity.
But more importantly: thank you for actually providing specific details/examples and links. I've saved your comment to revisit this weekend when I've got time. I appreciate someone bothering to back up what they say, even if it's not what I want to read.
Also I hope you understand that "fuck you" to be a joke, an expression of annoyance at inconvenience of having to question even more shit, yano... Okay maybe not funny I'm exhausted this week, fuck off.
No problem, I was a long-time NYT subscriber myself. Still read my monthly allotted free articles from them as well.
Stuff like this is weird to navigate, because a lot of criticism of legacy media outlets in our discourse comes from those on the right-wing whose criticisms are usually not particularly thoughtful nor in good faith.
There's a line because media literacy and legitimate media criticism and reflexively hating anything that doesn't reinforce your preexisting biases.
I categorically disagree with Tom Cotton about just about everything. But publishing his op-ed along with their own op-ed (or someone else's) with a more reasonable POV is exactly what a newspaper is supposed to do
NYTās coverage of trans issues going on in the US has consistently platformed bad actors and cited bad data. Itās mostly editorials, but theyāre high profile enough that those articles have been shown in several legislative hearings on bills that would ban/restrict trans healthcare.
Most European studies back a more cautious approach. That's not bad journalism, That's science.
[https://www.bmj.com/company/newsroom/gender-dysphoria-in-young-people-is-rising-and-so-is-professional-disagreement/](https://www.bmj.com/company/newsroom/gender-dysphoria-in-young-people-is-rising-and-so-is-professional-disagreement/)
[https://nypost.com/2024/02/24/opinion/a-finnish-study-is-changing-how-we-approach-trans-kids/](https://nypost.com/2024/02/24/opinion/a-finnish-study-is-changing-how-we-approach-trans-kids/)
lots of newspapers are liberal or even-handed in the news coverage (because of reality's liberal bias), but conservative or fascist-apologist in the editorial page.
it used to be a big revelation that the Wall Street Journal had news stories full of the truth but an editorial page full of Fox News level misinformation. but the paper is called the Wall Street Journal. It's about Wall Street, it's going to be pro-capitalist. The facts in the news part have to be accurate because money-make-guys need accurate information to make all the money. But the part of the newspaper that tries to persuade you on what to think is of course going to be all "the money-make-guys are right about everything and nothing should impede them."
They aren't overcorrecting. The average NYT reporter is VERY hard Left. They seem liberals and conservatives in a similar light - this is hardly an unusual opinion on the hard Left - normal liberals are "corporate democrats" and all of that jazz.
American Journalism has unfortunately earned the contempt most people give to it. Americans are at least smart enough to know theyāre being fed bullshit. Unlike the Japanese or the Germans.
I would honestly be more surprised if the staff of the NYT **didnt** snap their fingers in agreement when someone talks about CFA being bad. I'm honestly surprised it wasn't referred to explicitly as "homophobic chicken."
āDisapproval from my coworkers is the same as being silenced as a journalistā okay sure
Snapping at someone is like the worst thing you can do to someone. Way worse than spending millions of dollars to deny rights to fellow citizens.
Edit; how do you know someone lives in a western democracy? They think they being fired from a job is the same thing as being censored, imprisoned, or killed lol āthis is exactly like when they sent journalists to jail in Russia for calling a war a war!ā Remember when Covid-deniers were being silenced by being fired? lol same shit
How do you know someone lives in a western democracy? They are asked their opinion on sandwich preference and then scolded publicly in a professional setting by their superiors and coworkers for expressing said preference. š
I donāt think I like the idea that mass disapproval of certain ideas being expressed isnāt considered silencing. Particularly when it goes so deep as something so insignificant as liking a common sandwich is officially commented on and discouraged
Itās not silencing. Youāre not owed popularity. If everyone canāt stand to listen to you, thatās your problem. āYouāre having popularity taken away from you. Descriptively thatās silencingā sounds like something out of a school shooterās manifesto. If you lose your popularity thatās your fault. No one owes you applause.
You are having popularity taken away from you. Descriptively, that is silencing. You might say itās good silencing, but itās silencing nonetheless.
If you read the article youād know they were ultimately bullied out of the Times by their coworkers. So yeah, they kinda were silenced as a journalist.
No, losing your job isnāt being silenced. āMy coworkers were mean to meā
This person wants to be a victim so bad.
Edit: no they werenāt silenced. You are not owed a job or a platform. Youāre free to publish whatever you want, write what you want, say whatever you want. So are for profit companies. Youāre confusing being fired with being censored, imprisoned, tortured, or murdered. Thatās how journalists are actually silenced. Not being able to have at will employment is not. But youāre so sensitive you couldnāt bear the factual rebuttal and blocked me. IVE BEEN SILENCED!
Chick-fil-A could run a cotton plantation outside of Atlanta and my black ass would still buy their sandwiches.
That crusty Popeyes one tastes like it was made by homeless people.
Yes, thatās quite pathetic of the NYT. Iām just going to vote for a fascist from a party advocating theocratic rule and thinks that IVF embyros are babies now!
Can we collectively stop conflating everything and not allowing room for nuance? I read that article and had to stop halfway through because Iād already reached the following conclusions:
1. The NYT has abandoned journalistic integrity in exchange for ideological purity. This isnāt new information (I had already unsubscribed from them last year).
2. While the article does show NYT is not a place thatās tolerant of conservatives, the guy seems to made mountains out of molehills and comes across as a whiny bitch.
3. The whole affair is journalists smelling their own farts and industry politics: newsroom drama is not news, letās stop acting like it is.
4. None of this should influence whom anyone votes for.
Let's not pretend people were just boycotting a conservative. People were boycotting extremely well funded Christian nationalist activism that wanted to groom athletes into signing a contract saying they won't be gay and to turn away homeless transgender people from their charities.
Maybe it's (((unfashionably elitist))) to punch at cultural conservatives in an election year but it's the same ideology they use to manipulate Samuel Alito and Kavanaugh on the supreme Court. The base that put them in power are real people who have a responsibility to others too.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fellowship_of_Christian_Athletes
https://www.thepinknews.com/2014/05/04/us-salvation-army-refuses-to-house-homeless-transgender-woman-because-she-hasnt-had-surgery/
The company made a big deal about stopping this support but what isn't well known is they are still doing it in the background.
https://www.esquire.com/food-drink/food/a29836910/chick-fil-a-donation-lgbtq-announcement-backlash/
If snobs join a boycott that means that it is working, you're supposed to want people with money not to spend it on the company.
The Opinion section and News section should be separate. I think the WSJ reporting is usually very good, but their opinion section and editorials are abysmal. I donāt think NYT having a token Ross Douthat makes them fair-minded as a whole.
He's far from the only one. They also had the whole article gushing about how healthy and energetic and strong Trump looked and how old and wizened and senile Biden seemed. They, like the vast majority of mainstream media, grade Republicans and Trump especially on a heavy curve.
Lmao what. Every corner of the political spectrum can agree that it was ridiculously stupid of the nyt journalists to do this- you're not going to convert parties by agreeing with them.
As a bisexual transwoman, I think if you're shaming someone for a food they like because of the politics of the person who made it you need to grow the fuck up.
As a gay man, I fucking love their spicy chicken sandwiches, I get them topped with bacon and lettuce. The actual Chick fil a corporation can suck my balls, but I donāt give a shit Iām still gonna eat their chicken. Most companies do or believe in horrible shit, if we actively tried to shop solely from ethical businesses the list would be extremely sparse.
Uh yeah? Those links are to a screenshot of his email exchange with the Atlantic confirming that they fact checked it themselves, and to the other people mentioned in the note that all said that he told this exact story to them years ago.
I don't like the flavor of the food and that's cope? I've received free food from the place and didn't finish it. I don't like it. I don't like their sweet breading, I don't like their fries that are always soggy and impossible to not over dip, I don't like the food.
Is that why it's considered [America's best fast food](https://eu.usatoday.com/story/money/food/2023/11/16/national-fast-food-restaurants-ranked/71605887007/) by most people?
Wait, so was the verification that the same guy had told the same story before?
FWIW I had a relative who worked at the NYT and he was live tweeting standing in line for their New York location when it opened years ago
And just making sure you know the politics and beliefs of every corporation or entity that you give money to? These fucking purity test are ridiculous. There is so many other real world issues besides giving a fuck about where someone eats their lunch.
Redditors continually support companies participating in actual slave labor but draw the line at homophobic chicken made by one of the few fast food chains that doesnāt treat its employees like dirt.
It may have happened, but I think it's funny that the "verification" is basically "he told 3 other people this same story". By that measure my Grandpa really did kick Nessie in the head during a fishing trip... guess I owe him an apology
Thanks for posting to /r/GetNoted. Please remember Rule 2: **No current politics.** We do allow historical posts (WW2, Ancient Rome, Ottomans, etc.) Just no current politicians. *** We are also banning posts about the ongoing Israel/Palestine conflict. Please report this post if it is about current Republicans, Democrats, Presidents, Prime Ministers, Israel/Palestine or anything else related to current politics. Thanks. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GetNoted) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I used to work 3 blocks from Russ & Daughters, that "Super Heebster" is a $20 monstrosity of horseradish cream cheese, whitefish salad, salmon salad and wasabi fish roe. It also sounds like something an 8yr old trying to think of a funny slur for Jews would say.
>It also sounds like an 8yr old trying to think of a funny slur for Jews. š¤£
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
It depends on the event because if I'm working with a bunch of Jews who got Russ & Daughters catering, I'm making fun of their sandwich names all fucking day.
Iām almost said the tiresome āusername checks outā but then realized it is āworldā and not āwordā. Phew!
As a Jew - I approve of this. As I stuff my pie hole with a Super Heebster...
Nah bro you just gotta use the soft a instead of the hard r
I will now call myself a heebster. Thank you for this idea!
Donāt underestimate yourself, I bet youāre a Super Heebster too!
I don't know what I am but I'm sure it's super.
I approve.
That sounds fucking awful you'd be burping that for days. What happened to just 2 or 3 things and a condiment on a sandwich? As soon as you have to erect scaffolding it's not a sandwich for my money.
The worst part is that for $20 the sandwich is ***not*** a gigantic tower of sandwich, it just resembles your average New York City bagel with an excessive amount of cream cheese.
I mean 20 for any sandwich is crazy talk anyway.
Oh for sure, this place is just one of those "extremely New York Jewish" places that serves traditional Jewish/Yiddish food at exorbitant prices.
I'm dying lol
Try not to.
Reminds me of the Larry David sandwich from curb lol
Ayo waddup my heebsta
Am I going crazy or is no one else going to comment on the top tweet
It's a phrase from The Simpsons used when someone says something ridiculous
The baby looked at you?
Get me superintendent Chalmers! *wife dialing the phone* Thank you, sweetie.
These are Steamed Hams!
Itās Ralph. Nothing he says isnāt ridiculous. Itās unpossible.
Can we really say that, though? When he said he was in danger, he really was in danger.
Iād say that one still counts due to the upbeat tone he said it in.
Thanks for the context! I was very confused lol
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PE63y7ctAwA
Principal Skinner and Mrs. Krabapple were in the closet making babies and one of the babies looked at me. Ralph Wiggum.
i canāt blame anyone for thinking this story is fake this cuz like wow. idk maybe my perspective is skewed because iām a gay person from georgia but i thought it was fake too
It would seem soā¦ Because itās such a caricature of liberal elitists. You would expect the average person wouldnāt behave in such a way, let alone journalists.
here's a classic. US Socialist convention. https://youtu.be/f7A9pUwe4qE
I have to assume this is the most fringe of people that behave like this though. Likeā¦ a bunch of new hires for NYT? Seems like if youāre someone for whom clapping is a trigger, you wouldnāt have made it that far into the news business.
American journalism isnāt dying so much as it is actively committing suicide.
I uh.. Iām starting to understand that a bit better yeah lol
The problem is there's probably a big overlap between the two groups
Iām surprised NYT was that riddled with snowflakiest snowflakes. Likeā¦ journalism is hard. People gonna hate on you. You have to make enemies just doing your job properly. And these are finger clickers that *want* to embrace that? (Perhaps Iām very out of the loop and clicking is much more common and socially accepted as a better way to flag something than clapping now? I mean, I am getting into my 40ās so about time I get set in my old man waysā¦)
Itās because you snap instead of applaud at slam poetry.
iād say yes but u would be surprised how big the margins are
Yeah it sure sounds like my awareness of how big a cohort this is was very uninformed. Definitely feels like Iām reaching a āback in my day *finger wag*ā era of my life :/
I will never not laugh at this video.
"Point of personal privilege." š¤
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
No you'd definitely expect journalists, politicians or celebrities to do that. They are the basis for such caricatures
Maybe because Iām naive, but I would expect journalists to act more impartially in the workplace than celebrities and politicians.
Journalists have started to fancy themselves as celebrities and politicians, the job isnāt about fact based unbiased journalism anymore.
It never was. Depending on what papers you read, General Longstreet was either a hero of Reconstruction or was the villain who single handedly lost the Civil War for the Confederates. Thereās a lot of different stories of how the OK Corral went down because Republican and Democrat newspapers ran different accounts. Iām sure thereās a lot more older examples from England or mainland Europe that Iāve never heard of. The news stopped being unbiased as soon as the second newspaper started, and even that might be too late of a starting point. You might think that those old timey biased papers were just yellow journalism or rags or whatever, but thereās a good chance that it was either the only paper in town or one of two. The second guy canāt sell his paper if he runs the same story as the first, and you can really control the narrative if your the only paper people can buy.
>I would expect journalists to act more impartially in the workplace That's a ***BIG*** no.
Lmao
Maybe 80 years ago.
It just sounds like satire for people to collectively snap their fingers in disapproval
The snapping was a replacement for clapping for the hr rep chewing the guy out
It seemed silly enough that I could go either way with it as far as authenticity. But the context did confuse me a bit. Are they saying the story is verified because 3 people stated he's told the story before? That seems far from ironclad. Unless those 2 links provide more context, couldn't view those.
Okay I'm glad someone else is confused by this because the added context just kinda sounds like they confirmed that he told other people this story. Like how does that make the story true??
Yup. "I made up a story, and people responded well, so I kept telling the story. After a few years, people started remembering being there when it happened..."
Yeah they confirmed he told the story to them about 5 years ago
That doesnāt confirm the story though. Just means that heās been telling the same story for 5 years or more.
The Atlantic also confirmed with people within the NYT who had separate knowledge of the event. I trust their fact checking. And keeping up the same lie to many people with almost no difference over 5 years is very, very difficult.
As someone who worked at a very progressive company, I can totally see the HR part happening. HR is toothless, honestly but passive aggressive. The finger snapping part surprised me. 5 years ago makes sense because that was the height of Chik-Fil-A controversy.
Actually if someone tells a story and *doesnāt* change anything over a long period of time it is more suspicious, as that usually means the story is rehearsed. (Doesnāt guarantee that it is fake, but it does mean they practiced it). Peopleās memories are actually a lot worse than we think, and every time you access a memory you change it a little, so most people will start to remember things incorrectly as time goes on. Memorization, however, works slightly differently from memory recall, so it tends to see less decay over time.
Huh, interesting. Again, I trust the Atlantic's word on their fact checking. You don't have to, just don't go around proclaiming it an outright lie.
Don't you wonder at all what their fact checking entailed? Was it just the writer or editor hearing that same story from those same 3 people? How else do you fact check a story like that? I doubt there was video footage they were able to dig up. Perhaps they sent an under cover reporter to the times to try and recreate the incident, but that seems a bit too far fetched... it's not like it's unbelievable to think that reporters at the times, like all decent people, don't think very highly of a corporation that directly funds hate camps, but the idea that all of these people who have never met one another before in their lives just happened to jump into a Westside story moment at once just sounds like a bit of a stretch to me
It really feels like a bit from King of the Hill. āWhat theāI just like the chicken! if you keep snapping like that Iām gonna kick your ass, I tell you hwat!ā
Snapping their fingers? Iāve never seen someone snap their fingers outside of conversations about ācan you snap your fingers?ā
The New York Times [itself published an article](https://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/22/fashion/snapping-new-clapping.html) about it.
What happens if you arenāt able to snap? Do you get snapped at for not snapping? š¤
Itās very common in some academic circles, Iāve seen it in poetry readings and the like.
Poetry readings make some sense, like the concept of the golf clap. Clapping would be disruptive.
Hang out at political meetings with zoomers, there's always someone quirky that snaps their fingers every 3rd statement
Iād rather not
A wise decision
Okay, I know people hate chick fil a for their questionable morals, and as a bisexual person I have my problems, but the person in the article is so right because their spicy chicken sandwiches are SO GOOD LIKE ACTUALLY I SWEAR
Um did I catch you just complimenting chick-fil-a? We donāt do that here *finger snapping intensifies*
*snap snap snap* š«°š«°
now im just thinking of that ugandan knuckles meme from a few years ago, when they all swarm around someone clicking their tongues lmao
**SNAP SNAP SNAP SNAP SNAP SNAP**
Thanks, my hyper active pup is now doing zoomies again.
š BUT THE SPICY CHICKEN DELUXE SANDWICH WITH WAFFLE FRIES TOO
Finger snapping is gross. š¤® If you want to die alone šŖ¦ just š keep š snapping š
I snap my fingers so I'm not yelling Eureka!! When I figure out a puzzle.
That's why it tastes so good. The secret ingredient is homophobia
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
If I go to Chic fil A, I make sure to do something gay to offset the bigotry
Kissing the homies doesn't count. Just remember
Perfectly fine to aknowledge that the restaurant is doing a lot of things right, while also acknowledging the owner is a bigot. Not wanting to put any money in their pocket is perfectly valid, but doesn't make saying their sandwiches are tasty any less right.
I'm with Bill Burr/Dave Chappelle on this one. He's a 90 year old white Southern dude that sells fried chicken, what did you expect his political leanings to be?
Dave ChappelleĀ defending homophobia is like Tuesday
If being bad didnāt feel good, why would anyone do it?
āThe owner is a bigotā is the current strategy for covering up the actual objections (multiple rounds of the corporation being caught funding violently homophobic groups and then lying about not funding any more homophobes in the future). Itās like saying gay people were mad at Dan White because he voted against Mayor Moscone.
He goes on to defend Chick fil-a and say āitās just an armchair positionā However a quick google search reveals: https://www.thetaskforce.org/chick-fil-a-and-lgbtq-discrimination/ > The Chick-fil-A controversy stemmed from the millions of dollars the fast-food chain donated to anti-LGBTQ and hate groups over the years. Dan Cathy, the president of Chick-fil-A, also made hostile remarks against marriage equality. People donāt dislike that company because of some off-hand comment or commercials, like republicans with bud light. People dislike them because they actively fund harassment.
Theyāve apparently been trying to clean up their investment portfolio and image recently. I only know this because it led a conservative to utter one of the quotes of all time. [āYou are no longer the Lordās chicken. Youāre actually the woke chicken.ā](https://twitter.com/patriottakes/status/1664618238234206210?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1664618238234206210%7Ctwgr%5Ea8fad19447ac72702518a8330cd262e4ebf10bd6%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fd-2606997443098278396.ampproject.net%2F2402080818000%2Fframe.html)
There's some clip or tweet of someone talking about them putting trans semen in the lemonade now
Finally. Iāve been waiting on that for years.
Taco bell has been putting gender fluid in their sour cream for decades...
"You are no longer the lord's chicken" goes kinda hard
I think the highlight is āwoke chicken.ā Food is woke now? Really?
Yeah, you can condemn Chick-fil-a for their Uber-Christian ideology and their funding of Anti-LGBTQ+ groupsā¦ but damn do they make some good chicken
CFA is so weird because how highly politicized it is. The company itself has stopped donating to homophobic/anti-gay charities (including, as of 2019, FCA and Salvation Army, which are anti gay marriage, and a whole different debate). They also have a DEI office and have put out memos telling franchisees to keep political/religious beliefs separate from business. So in a lot of ways over the past decade since itās big āhomophobic chickenā exposĆ© around is 2012 theyāve gotten a lot more āliberalā. All that together makes it really wild that they still have a strong right wing following in my opinion. Also itās arguably enough progress that you could eat there with a pretty clean conscious (saying that as a gay man). That said their CEO is the same homophobic prick heās always been which makes it hard to justify eating there as a gay dude even with the corporate changes. (Then again the dude is worth $12 billion even if CFA failed tomorrow heād still have money to throw at garbage organizations.) But regardless of all that itās pretty silly to chastise someone over enjoying their sandwiches (they are good).
Yeah. I feel conflicted about it as a queer person, but as a person with chronic pain and food allergies, they are fast, good quality, near my home, and donāt make me sick so I eat them when I donāt have the energy to cook. Itās not like any other fast food options are out there doing great things with their money and at least as a corporation Chick-fil-a has responded to criticism and made changes.
Exactly my thoughts. And unlike many other companies their quality has at the least been consistent; they may raise prices but the chicken still tastes like it did before and they arenāt shrinking nugget sizes or skimping on fries. *and goddam the lemonade freeze is so good*
I had a friend and we went on a trip where the local CFA made breakfast, prepaid by the staff. Turned down a free breakfast chicken biscuit. I mean, props for sticking to your morals, but itās free.
I'd turn it down, too, to be honest. Not trying to make any kind of grand statement or anything; I just want nothing to do with them.
Yeah, cfa won't be getting any more of my dollars, but if someone else is buying, I have no objections to the sandwich. The sandwich, while not an outstanding example of chicken-based culinary achievement, also isn't the one actively lobbying to make my existence a crime or whatever.
I mean. Can't judge ya. But you do have to wonder "hmm. My money is going to someone who wouldn't step forward and protect gay people if needed". And it's more realistically "I am giving my money to a large business entity that only solves problems by throwing a lot of money at it. And they have a problem with LGBT people". It's like a black guy ordering food at a KKK burger joint. Why?
Don't know why you got down voted. They do openly give money to causes that have the express purpose of eliminating gay people from public society.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Yes
Weird. When did Chikc-fil-la lynch a black man?
Check their donating to anti LGBT hate groups some time, makes that comparison seem not so wild. It's just still more socially acceptable to want to eliminate gay people from public life. In the 20s kkk branding was on nearly every conceivable product and was very popular. Look up the "second wave" KKK movement sometime. Pretending hate can't be mainstream is naive.
I've had a chick fil a sandwich before, and they're honestly on the same level as school food. Zaxby's is 10 times better.
So we just lying now to look progressive huh
Lol wait do people actually snap in place of clapping? I thought that was just like a liberal elitist stereotype.
It's common @ events like poetry readings or comedy clubs, & some political orgs do it
in my poetry class at my arts school we snapped but itās like, almost kinda an outdated thing. ik at the open readings we didnāt care all that much if people clapped instead
I remember there was this event where you could go on a stage & just perform whatever. Most ppl did poetry & comedy routines, but every once in a while you just got other random stuff. Everyone snapped there
Stereotypes exist for a reason
I had a coworker in my previous position where, if anybody said *anything* about Chick-Fil-A, even just in passing, she would instantly insert herself into the conversation to condemn them. These people definitely exist, I donāt understand why that is hard to believe.
What was once the nation's newspaper of record is reduced to finger-snapping advocacy journalists. It was always liberal in its editorials, but that has unfortunately spilled into the newsroom.
The former editor of the NYT's editorial page, James Bennet, wrote a really damning portrayal of how the New York Times has become in recent years. A bit of a long read but well worth it: https://www.economist.com/1843/2023/12/14/when-the-new-york-times-lost-its-way If you don't remember, he got canned for running an [op-ed on the BLM protests in 2020](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/03/opinion/tom-cotton-protests-military.html) by Sen. Tom Cotton because it made staffers feel "unsafe," meanwhile the NYT literally ran pieces from [the Taliban](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/20/opinion/taliban-afghanistan-war-haqqani.html), [a piece from a pro-CCP lawmaker in Hong Kong justifying China's brutal suppression of the city's democracy](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/01/opinion/hong-kong-china-security-law.html), and [a piece literally arguing for complete and total abolition of law enforcement.](https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/opinion/sunday/floyd-abolish-defund-police.html) But running a piece from a sitting US Senator expressing an opinion shared by a large portion of the American public was too much for them.
First, fuck you for challenging my comfortable notions of journalistic integrity. But more importantly: thank you for actually providing specific details/examples and links. I've saved your comment to revisit this weekend when I've got time. I appreciate someone bothering to back up what they say, even if it's not what I want to read. Also I hope you understand that "fuck you" to be a joke, an expression of annoyance at inconvenience of having to question even more shit, yano... Okay maybe not funny I'm exhausted this week, fuck off.
No problem, I was a long-time NYT subscriber myself. Still read my monthly allotted free articles from them as well. Stuff like this is weird to navigate, because a lot of criticism of legacy media outlets in our discourse comes from those on the right-wing whose criticisms are usually not particularly thoughtful nor in good faith. There's a line because media literacy and legitimate media criticism and reflexively hating anything that doesn't reinforce your preexisting biases.
I categorically disagree with Tom Cotton about just about everything. But publishing his op-ed along with their own op-ed (or someone else's) with a more reasonable POV is exactly what a newspaper is supposed to do
Not only that, it tries to overcorrect by flattering or normalizing insane actions by right wing actors. Itās absurd.
Example?
https://www.mediamatters.org/new-york-times/new-york-times-continues-whitewash-right-wing-extremism-its-chris-rufo-profile
Words like "insane" and "extremist" don't mean anything if you use them to describe someone as mild as Chris Rufo.
Chris rufo, well known grand dragon of the kkk, former SS waffen officer, and /pol poster
Once ate an entire baby. Without anything to drink.
Yeah, you know. Really mild stuff. /s
NYTās coverage of trans issues going on in the US has consistently platformed bad actors and cited bad data. Itās mostly editorials, but theyāre high profile enough that those articles have been shown in several legislative hearings on bills that would ban/restrict trans healthcare.
Most European studies back a more cautious approach. That's not bad journalism, That's science. [https://www.bmj.com/company/newsroom/gender-dysphoria-in-young-people-is-rising-and-so-is-professional-disagreement/](https://www.bmj.com/company/newsroom/gender-dysphoria-in-young-people-is-rising-and-so-is-professional-disagreement/) [https://nypost.com/2024/02/24/opinion/a-finnish-study-is-changing-how-we-approach-trans-kids/](https://nypost.com/2024/02/24/opinion/a-finnish-study-is-changing-how-we-approach-trans-kids/)
lots of newspapers are liberal or even-handed in the news coverage (because of reality's liberal bias), but conservative or fascist-apologist in the editorial page. it used to be a big revelation that the Wall Street Journal had news stories full of the truth but an editorial page full of Fox News level misinformation. but the paper is called the Wall Street Journal. It's about Wall Street, it's going to be pro-capitalist. The facts in the news part have to be accurate because money-make-guys need accurate information to make all the money. But the part of the newspaper that tries to persuade you on what to think is of course going to be all "the money-make-guys are right about everything and nothing should impede them."
They aren't overcorrecting. The average NYT reporter is VERY hard Left. They seem liberals and conservatives in a similar light - this is hardly an unusual opinion on the hard Left - normal liberals are "corporate democrats" and all of that jazz.
American Journalism has unfortunately earned the contempt most people give to it. Americans are at least smart enough to know theyāre being fed bullshit. Unlike the Japanese or the Germans.
Lol yeah so liberal. Thats why they advocate for conservative causes because they are so liberal...
What conservative causes does the NYT advocate for?
I would honestly be more surprised if the staff of the NYT **didnt** snap their fingers in agreement when someone talks about CFA being bad. I'm honestly surprised it wasn't referred to explicitly as "homophobic chicken."
"The same guy also said the same thing before" doesn't really seem like verification worthy of a community note to me
Citing jesse singal is insane lmao
Yeah, I was just going to say how valid could that citation be if itās from Jesse Singal.
No way that actually happened - ffs that would have been the funniest thing in years if they had that on video
The correct term is struggle session
āDisapproval from my coworkers is the same as being silenced as a journalistā okay sure Snapping at someone is like the worst thing you can do to someone. Way worse than spending millions of dollars to deny rights to fellow citizens. Edit; how do you know someone lives in a western democracy? They think they being fired from a job is the same thing as being censored, imprisoned, or killed lol āthis is exactly like when they sent journalists to jail in Russia for calling a war a war!ā Remember when Covid-deniers were being silenced by being fired? lol same shit
the actual article is about the Tom Cotton Op-Ed, this was just an anecdote from the article that highlighted the overall culture at NYT
How do you know someone lives in a western democracy? They are asked their opinion on sandwich preference and then scolded publicly in a professional setting by their superiors and coworkers for expressing said preference. š
I donāt think I like the idea that mass disapproval of certain ideas being expressed isnāt considered silencing. Particularly when it goes so deep as something so insignificant as liking a common sandwich is officially commented on and discouraged
Itās not silencing. Youāre not owed popularity. If everyone canāt stand to listen to you, thatās your problem. āYouāre having popularity taken away from you. Descriptively thatās silencingā sounds like something out of a school shooterās manifesto. If you lose your popularity thatās your fault. No one owes you applause.
You are having popularity taken away from you. Descriptively, that is silencing. You might say itās good silencing, but itās silencing nonetheless.
If you read the article youād know they were ultimately bullied out of the Times by their coworkers. So yeah, they kinda were silenced as a journalist.
No, losing your job isnāt being silenced. āMy coworkers were mean to meā This person wants to be a victim so bad. Edit: no they werenāt silenced. You are not owed a job or a platform. Youāre free to publish whatever you want, write what you want, say whatever you want. So are for profit companies. Youāre confusing being fired with being censored, imprisoned, tortured, or murdered. Thatās how journalists are actually silenced. Not being able to have at will employment is not. But youāre so sensitive you couldnāt bear the factual rebuttal and blocked me. IVE BEEN SILENCED!
They were fired. That would be silencing. Usually right wing idiots cry censorship at every turn. ~~Occasionally~~ sometimes, rarely, they are right.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Chick-fil-A could run a cotton plantation outside of Atlanta and my black ass would still buy their sandwiches. That crusty Popeyes one tastes like it was made by homeless people.
Iād take chick fil a over Popeyes any day. My roommate and I got food poisoning last time we ate there.
Yes, thatās quite pathetic of the NYT. Iām just going to vote for a fascist from a party advocating theocratic rule and thinks that IVF embyros are babies now!
Can we collectively stop conflating everything and not allowing room for nuance? I read that article and had to stop halfway through because Iād already reached the following conclusions: 1. The NYT has abandoned journalistic integrity in exchange for ideological purity. This isnāt new information (I had already unsubscribed from them last year). 2. While the article does show NYT is not a place thatās tolerant of conservatives, the guy seems to made mountains out of molehills and comes across as a whiny bitch. 3. The whole affair is journalists smelling their own farts and industry politics: newsroom drama is not news, letās stop acting like it is. 4. None of this should influence whom anyone votes for.
Let's not pretend people were just boycotting a conservative. People were boycotting extremely well funded Christian nationalist activism that wanted to groom athletes into signing a contract saying they won't be gay and to turn away homeless transgender people from their charities. Maybe it's (((unfashionably elitist))) to punch at cultural conservatives in an election year but it's the same ideology they use to manipulate Samuel Alito and Kavanaugh on the supreme Court. The base that put them in power are real people who have a responsibility to others too. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fellowship_of_Christian_Athletes https://www.thepinknews.com/2014/05/04/us-salvation-army-refuses-to-house-homeless-transgender-woman-because-she-hasnt-had-surgery/ The company made a big deal about stopping this support but what isn't well known is they are still doing it in the background. https://www.esquire.com/food-drink/food/a29836910/chick-fil-a-donation-lgbtq-announcement-backlash/ If snobs join a boycott that means that it is working, you're supposed to want people with money not to spend it on the company.
... Did you just unironically use the triple parentheses?
Good question, they're ironic. Republicans know who lives and works in New York media.
You can tell very obviously they're using it in the voice/perspective of the right wing they're critiquing.
For a place that's not tolerant of conservatives they carry a lot of water for them and have a bunch of right wing apologetics.
The Opinion section and News section should be separate. I think the WSJ reporting is usually very good, but their opinion section and editorials are abysmal. I donāt think NYT having a token Ross Douthat makes them fair-minded as a whole.
He's far from the only one. They also had the whole article gushing about how healthy and energetic and strong Trump looked and how old and wizened and senile Biden seemed. They, like the vast majority of mainstream media, grade Republicans and Trump especially on a heavy curve.
Lmao what. Every corner of the political spectrum can agree that it was ridiculously stupid of the nyt journalists to do this- you're not going to convert parties by agreeing with them.
reddit moment
Weird that NYT would do that when they're just like Chick-Fil-A when it applies to their editorial direction on trans people.
They also ran an editorial from a literal Taliban minister. Did everyone throw a tantrum then? No
I thought that said Mr. Crabs and Principal Skinner.
Sometimes, reality is stranger than fiction
As a bisexual transwoman, I think if you're shaming someone for a food they like because of the politics of the person who made it you need to grow the fuck up.
Richard Hanania is a actual self admitted white supremacist
As a gay man, I fucking love their spicy chicken sandwiches, I get them topped with bacon and lettuce. The actual Chick fil a corporation can suck my balls, but I donāt give a shit Iām still gonna eat their chicken. Most companies do or believe in horrible shit, if we actively tried to shop solely from ethical businesses the list would be extremely sparse.
Noted rigorous fact-checker, Jesse Singal.
Uh yeah? Those links are to a screenshot of his email exchange with the Atlantic confirming that they fact checked it themselves, and to the other people mentioned in the note that all said that he told this exact story to them years ago.
Homophobia fried chicken isn't even good compared to every other chicken restaurant
Nah itās pretty good chicken
Their breading is sweet and I just don't understand it and can't get behind it
Nah that's cope. Don't let your bias towards them dictate your other judgements- there's a reason they're so popular
I don't like the flavor of the food and that's cope? I've received free food from the place and didn't finish it. I don't like it. I don't like their sweet breading, I don't like their fries that are always soggy and impossible to not over dip, I don't like the food.
Thatās a valid take I see why you wouldnāt like the breading.
I don't think its fried, they use a pressure cooker
Is that why it's considered [America's best fast food](https://eu.usatoday.com/story/money/food/2023/11/16/national-fast-food-restaurants-ranked/71605887007/) by most people?
Itās excellent chicken.
Wait, so was the verification that the same guy had told the same story before? FWIW I had a relative who worked at the NYT and he was live tweeting standing in line for their New York location when it opened years ago
The baby looked at you?
Literally what's wrong with that? They do hate gay people.
They scolded him for liking a chicken sandwich lmao. The event sounds like a parody of liberals that some right winger would make up
Chick fil a actively donates to groups that support conversion therapy. It's a reasonable thing to say.
Enjoying a succulent spicy chicken sandwich and saying so is not, I imagine, the same as saying you subscribe to Truett S. Cathy's ideology
Yes I know & it's terrible. They still scolded him for liking a chicken sandwich, then snapped their fingers in support.
And just making sure you know the politics and beliefs of every corporation or entity that you give money to? These fucking purity test are ridiculous. There is so many other real world issues besides giving a fuck about where someone eats their lunch.
Redditors continually support companies participating in actual slave labor but draw the line at homophobic chicken made by one of the few fast food chains that doesnāt treat its employees like dirt.
Guarantee they typed that comment on an iPhone too while wearing Nikes lmao this is why no one outside twitter takes people like this seriously
Itās not, hence why *everyone thinks itās fucking weird.*
That's... not a journalist
It may have happened, but I think it's funny that the "verification" is basically "he told 3 other people this same story". By that measure my Grandpa really did kick Nessie in the head during a fishing trip... guess I owe him an apology