With one important difference, this reminds me of the 1974 Emergency Highway Energy Conservation Act, which established a national speed limit of 55 MPH. States had to either adopt a state speed limit of 55 MPH, or else lose out on funding, i.e. get punished.

Of course, that was a law enacted by Congress, not an Executive order. I guess, traditionally, they say that for first quarter millennium of America, Congress held the purse strings because some inky piece of paper said they were supposed to, as if Congress could ever handle that much responsibility! Can you imagine?! Anyway, we've decided Fuck That Tradition, let's try something new and put a thieving tool in charge of the purse.

To be fair, Opera the company behind the browser changed hands several times since the original Opera. At which point it became a barely changed Chromium skin.

If you want a browser built by team formed from people that made original Opera with the kind of UI design philosophy that made original Opera's fame, you don't use modern Opera. You use Vivaldi. Modern Opera doesn't really have any meaningful commonalities with original Opera. Engine is different, team is different, even design is different.

Vivaldi at least maintained focus on specific UI things like panels that Opera was known for. It's in fact one part of the browser that isn't open source. They have proprietary UI that sits on top of Chromium.

Has it ever occurred to you that comparing any modern Western leader to North Korean leader as similar is so obviously wrong that you should stop and reconsider everything you believe about real world?

Follow down the thread for instructions how to get more such studies.

That all say the same thing.

I think you missed the subject, which is the complaint that pro-Trump propaganda is overwhelming.

I just searched "trump coverage positive vs negative" on startpage.
(Note the effort to make search terms steelman the opponent's position rather than my own by listing his position first, and then usage of anonymizer to reduce bias from search history).

Then clicked on the first link.

You can do the same, and click on the rest of the links. Overwhelming majority of them give similar numbers.

Measuring stick in question doesn't differentiate and condemns both.

It doesn't just contradict it. It condemns it as unreasonable.

To be fair, being exceedingly unreasonable is modus operandi of modern Western left.

What do you think happened to journalists who truthfully reported on Pakistani rape gangs in UK?

Saudis did their hit once. And have been desperate to demonstrate they got better since.

UK continues to aggressively prosecute anyone who dares to talk about what Pakistanis are doing to English right now. If anything, persecution is even more wide spread.

Going by the number of arrest for speech offenses in UK, yes by a massive margin.

Makes me wonder if you picked the nation with most arrests for speech on this planet by a massive margin on purpose because it's the kind of censorship program you approve of, or you genuinely didn't know.

You can use any of the couple dosen similar studies that all return similar numbers. Overwhelmingly negative coverage of Trump is a norm, has been a norm, and will likely persist as a norm.

Here's historic evidence from Pew:

https://www.pewresearch.org/jo...

Note the similar numbers. Only 5% positive for Trump.

This is really easy to individually comprehend too.

"What are five bad things Trump did. Are they talked about across mainstream right now and widely known on all sides of the spectrum?"

"What are five good things Trump did. Are they talked about across mainstream right now and widely known on all sides of the spectrum?"

Here's gold standard of such studies, Pew Research explaining why what you're asking for is unreasonable in their preamble of the old 2017 study:

https://www.pewresearch.org/jo...

They do in fact do a little bit better in terms of what they could gather and parse though, and results are even worse from "pro Trump propaganda", showing only 5% positive.

All nations and all peoples have plenty of "other qualities that make them highly unattractive for ownership of any news media in a Democratic nation".

Including all of "democratic nations".

Reminder: when your measuring stick returns same result of "has other qualities...", your measuring stick is unsuitable for purpose of determining what would a good fit.

I have bad news: values you listed are universally human. If that is your criteria for "partners", all humans are out.

For that matter, all life on this planet is out, because all life on this planet is motivated by greed and power. Because having a territory (power) from which you can gain nourishment (greed) is a prerequisite for everything else in life.

Imagine believing this when there are actual studies that show that Trump coverage is over 90% negative in US. For example, here's a recent one:

https://abc3340.com/news/natio...

You're literally in the world that is diametrically opposed to reality.