- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Man charged with health insurance CEO murder to accept $300,000 in donations
Lawyer says 26-year-old accused ‘very much appreciates the outpouring of support’ on fundraising platform
Mangione “very much appreciates the outpouring of support”, said a statement on GiveSendGo that was attributed to his attorney, Karen Friedman Agnifilo.
There’s only one occurrence of Luigi. The slogan was “free Luigi”, not “free Mangione”.
obligatory: I do not condone violence.
I just think that his was a political act like other historical regicides. Ravaillac is a historical name, like Luigi has now become. Why avoid it?
You must log in or register to comment.
They are worried about being sued by Nintendo
Obligatory: I DO condone violence
I do condone violence in self defense, such as against imminent threats including the mass murder of people in the pursuit of profits.
I don’t condone violence in general though.
Usually you mention a full name once (as done in the second paragraph) and then only use the last name. Fairly sure that’s how it goes for all normal articles. You see the same thing on Wikipedia. I do think the slogan should’ve been mentioned, though.
True. This post is not telling the whole truth.
this post is not “telling”, it is questioning!
The answer to any headline that’s a question is “No”.
not necessarily.
Well, your post confirms the law
You just didn’t read the article carefully.
i did. I always do.
agreed.
previous articles from different journalists, still from theGuardian, were doing exactly that
- https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/dec/23/luigi-mangione-court-charges
- https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/dec/21/luigi-mangione-racism-media
looking at Vargas’ article titles, maybe it’s coming from him. He routinely uses this pattern : https://www.theguardian.com/profile/ramon-antonio-vargas
@[email protected], you’re probably right. But the above articles were fairer, imo
Nah, it’s a standard journalism style.
deleted by creator
Um. Since when?
The Guardian often publishes the full name of criminal defendants, example here:
An alleged robbery in which £1.38m worth of watches were stolen from a shop in London was “staged” and everyone involved “consented”, including a jewellery store manager who later killed himself, a court has heard.
Junior Kunu, 30, and Mannix Pedro, 37, deny charges of conspiring with others to commit a robbery in Richmond, south-west London, on 25 May 2024.
Liberal papers such as the guardian or the New Yprk might be known for quality journalism, but they are also known to routinely side with the ruling class
And that’s the only mention of “Junior” and “Mannix” in that article.
Fair point
theGuardian, principally British, doesn’t seem to “routinely side with the ruling class”. Now that the Labour is the government, maybe that’s true. But the UK still has an archaic ruling class above their government that theGuardian is almost never siding with.
NYT, is clearly siding with “a class” but is that class ruling the United States? Rulers were sitting with the new king’s family during his inauguration and NYT were on the “fake news” corner. (an outsider’s interpretation)
I think “siding with the ruling class” means different things for us. For me its like this:
If you criticize individual presidents for their actions, but do not criticize the existence of a president, then you are sidig with the ruling class.
If you criticize political parties for their actions, but do not criticize the party system as whole, then you are sidig with the ruling class.
If you criticize individual capitalists for their actions, but do not criticize the system that allows them.to do their (and all other capitalists) exploitation, then you are sidig with the ruling class.
i can’t disagree if i edit your “ruling class” to “ruling classes”.
Like the proletariat, precariat and the slavelike migrants that are even below the two don’t belong to the same class
Lol, did you look at the article? They use his full name in the second paragraph.
