The stage and the player - updated
I had a time choosing which article to write a few short words on for this go round. Maybe the news about yet another journalist under fire for daring to speak against the higher-ups, or maybe snowballing coverage on religious authorities who abused the trust of their followers. Or maybe even on another tech behemoth called out on its mess, this time by someone who has the expertise to a) create the tech the behemoth uses, b) slam the misuse of that tech (changed because everyone's using decry, it seems), and c) find a solution. (Wonder when he'll show up on late-night talk shows.)
But if the title to this hasn't given it away by now, I'm looking at the coverage on a "beatdown" used to attack an opposing political ideology. I'm in a very strange position of hoping something bad actually did happen because it would mean that the story was true - whichever way that's cut, that doesn't sound right. Tainting one's big name supporters to the point they delete their support tweets? That's just not OK. And the use of branded clothing to promote one's own tacky worldview? Thanks for reminding me why I prefer to buy more solids.
I was going to ask what it felt like to be accused of self-harm because of one's political leanings, but it turns out these accusations might actually be grounded in something. I won't speculate here about just how dead one has to be inside to orchestrate something like this. But I will wonder how much slower investigations will become for anyone who might choose to come forward with similar reports, not because of focus on their attackers, but on their own voting record. And I will say that that write-in space on my ballot is reserved for someone I choose - not you. Applause.
Addendum: ending with this sentence as the player leaves the stage.