Nobody gave a flying fuck when Amy Schumer and Lena Dunham openly admitted to being rapists and pedophiles.
Citation needed. Googling Schumer and pedophile didn't come up with anything.
Lena Dunham DID get a lot of heat for writing that she touched her one year old sister when she was seven years old. It was predictably all from the far-right smear machine, the same one that has convinced many Americans that Hillary Clinton murdered soldiers at Benghazi on her way to build atomic bombs for Russia.
it's a witch hunt where all it takes is a social media post to ruin people's entire lives and career without a shred of evidence
You're projecting here. That is literally what you're doing.
Monsanto tried that too with their engineered crops. They were supposed to be unable to reproduce. And yet they did! Because mutations.
I think you're confusing three separate issues and believing they're a reality that fits what you want to believe.
Two: there have been lawsuits that monsanto pollen contaminated fields (you mention this below). It appears more likely the farmer in question intentionally cultivated GMO seeds, using roundup, and at any rate, that's much different from what you're suggesting.
Three: terminator seeds, which Monsanto developed, are unable to reproduce. These seeds were never sold. There's not much need: modern farmers aren't really interested in re-using seeds. First generation hybrids that are sold are superior, second generation seeds are a mix that aren't worth as much.
But hey, maybe you can react like they did, when they sued the farmers on whose fields the Monsanto crops had spread for copyright infringement and put them in prison for 10-20 years. Yes, that actually happened.
You're intentionally peddling lies here. The farmer in question planted the GMO seeds he didn't buy or license. I don't think he should have had to license seeds he obtained from his own land, so that part is shit, but he did knowingly use the seeds without paying the fee. He had to pay a small fine, NOT the lawyers fees, and he didn't fucking get sent to prison.
This, in turn is because the EXISTING regulatory regime produced exactly the non-competitive, single-point-of-view, broadcast media oligopoly that this regulation was SUPPOSED to prevent. Since it didn't work, why bother with it?
Seems a bit like saying "If my diet of single cheeseburgers isn't helping me lose weight, why don't I just start eating double quarter pounders?"
But people are getting their "news" from social media (which apparently includes internet-only news reporting operations) BECAUSE the broadcast news operations are ALREADY untrusted.
I worry about the type of people who do still get their news from broadcast TV. Seems to me that it's mainly moderate boomers. Judging from my father in law, once boomers start sitting in front of Fox News propaganda for hours on end, they veer more and more into Trump territory. Local news isn't great, but it's not Fox.
IF Sinclair buys up broadcast news, they'll turn a good chunk of moderate boomers either off news entirely or into GOP tools.
I'm steering well clear of partisan bias here (I voted 3rd-party if that tells you anything.)
Insisting both sides are equal, when that is clearly not the case, serves a partisan agenda.
The problem lies in the fact that the pro-illegal crowd intentionally conflates legal and illegal immigration when trying to paint their opponents as xenophobic, which in turn creates this stupid atmosphere of 'OAMG the administration hatez the dreamers!!!111!!one!!'
He's making moves to deport them by ending DACA, he's appointing officials who want to aggressively deport, makes false statements about crime caused by undocumented immigrants, and wants to bankrupt us building a wall between us and mexico.
On top of that, I mean, I've met Trump supporters. I'm a white dude. They don't exactly play their cards close to their chest on this subject.
You're trying to piss on my leg and tell me it's raining.
Genius is ten percent inspiration and fifty percent capital gains.