Comments
UNKWNDTH2002 t1_iuephrm wrote
this tbh
pocketdare t1_iufp053 wrote
I didn't even know what this title was supposed to be saying. Appears to be a word salad of jibberish
Duffman1973 t1_iuev9zm wrote
Just curious, how was " Richmond Can Remove Last Confederate Statue, Judge Rules" editorialized?
osiris_210 t1_iuez18i wrote
They were talking about the title of the post, not the article, saying it should match the headline of the article.
sleevieb t1_iuezdsb wrote
It wasn’t.
DeviantAnthro t1_iudc05p wrote
What's the article say?
coconut_sorbet t1_iudi3s9 wrote
Title & subtitle:
> Richmond Can Remove Last Confederate Statue, Judge Rules > > The statue of Ambrose P. Hill, a Confederate lieutenant general, has stood at an intersection in Virginia since 1892. His remains, buried beneath it, will be interred in a cemetery, the city said.
Charlesinrichmond OP t1_iudlujw wrote
basically same thing all the other ones do - AP Hill can be removed.
The interesting thing is it's in the New York Times.
komAnt t1_iudqhpf wrote
What's interesting about that?
Charlesinrichmond OP t1_iudsxo5 wrote
It's basically marketing. RVA goes on the radar as a place to live for people who either hadn't thought about it, or were pondering it but were worried we were just like Alabama. If you were marketing Richmond and buying ads this would cost a fortune
Basically "look! They are still cheap and aren't backward anymore!"
a form of the medium is the message. NYTs take on things gets loaded with authoritative affect.
Glen_YngkinDid_9-11 t1_iue0ucd wrote
It’s almost like the capital of a slave-state removing all of the statues glorifying that government is a big deal.
Charlesinrichmond OP t1_iufsuzy wrote
a thing yes. Big deal enormously overstates it though
Glen_YngkinDid_9-11 t1_iugqi3f wrote
How is it not a big deal?
Charlesinrichmond OP t1_iuieuc3 wrote
how on earth is it a big deal? It's a minor thing that's going to be forgotten in a decade. The very definition of temporary virtue signalling. The people getting bent out of shape about it are silly, and the people thinking its of lasting importance are also silly.
I think we should have just renamed Lee to "Grant" Stuart to "Sherman" etc. Would have achieved the same thing much more cheaply
Glen_YngkinDid_9-11 t1_iuj31uf wrote
I wonder if a Jew would feel like taking down a statue of Rommel is “virtue signaling?”
Why is everything about how “cheap” it is, for rightists? Maybe the expense wouldn’t matter if we actually taxed the landlords?
Spladdermonkey t1_iueybw3 wrote
Perlys. ..... to early?
[deleted] t1_iue1c94 wrote
[removed]
nartarf t1_iugcate wrote
Let’s not waste money here. There are plenty of volunteers around to take it down for free.
sleevieb t1_iudqluz wrote
Editorializing titles should be banned.