Frühere Suchanfragen
Suchoptionen
When an online editorial team turns "social status" into "cultural appropriation," the best practice for doing so looks like this:
Via http://Watson.ch
I have not read anywhere a statement by Tressie Macmillan Cottom in which she speaks of cultural appropriation.
The article written in German by @WatsonNews@twitter.com can be found here https://www.watson.ch/international/kultur/773904559-blond-faerben-ist-jetzt-auch-kulturelle-aneignung-oder-so-aehnlich
The addition in the URL "or something like that" (oder so ähnich) does not make it better.
Many legitimate outlets are confronted on a daily basis with the need to produce news quickly, because today online news is synonymous with "fast information consumption". There is often no time to think (ergo switch one's brain on) about what to publish and for what reason.
That is why these media outlets fall into the very trap we are trying to eradicate, that of spreading disinformation. Needless to say, the platform sells ad-invetory. We do not need to mention either that spreading polemics generates traffic, which in turn generates money.
I hope that it turns out that they got it wrong. I also hope that the editor has the decency to admit the mistake. Until then: #StopFundingHateNow
CC @jilevin@twitter.com @catthekin@twitter.com @nytimes@twitter.com @ufomedia@twitter.com