What did she say? The few quotes I've found so far don't seem to line up with what you are suggesting.
This reeks of a well-funded and orchestrated PR campaign to neuter Israel criticism at all cost. They're really grasping at straws here, and I get the feeling that if the outrage doesn't stick they'll suddenly stop talking about her at all and start stockpiling their money/energy for the next semi-tone deaf comment they can twist into a chest-thumping crusade against "antisemitism".
In this case, it looks more like it's Streisand effecting. (Affecting?)
The way I remember that Affect is active. You affect things. Effect is passive, and is the result of something. Affect is a verb (and I think sometimes can be a descriptor). Effect is always a noun. So you can have the resulting effect of an experiment, but if you mess with some variables, you have affected the effect.
Though, in this case, you're turning the noun into a verb, so you could make the case for either use I think. If you hyphenate it though you can leave it as is without thought. "Streisand-effecting.
Years ago I had a CEO of the company I worked at make a similar comment; "affect/effect. No one really knows which one to use." So my contrarian, anti-authority ass just looked it up right then and decided to always know.
According to what I've read just now, she said that amid the vile attacks against Jews in America "people that are afraid of being Jewish at this time are getting a taste of what it feels like to be a Muslim in this country."
This:
a. Minimizes the violence against Jews and Jewish Gathering places right now
b. Makes Jewish suffering secondary to the "real" suffering of Muslims
c. Denies the tragic history of antisemitism in America
d. Pits Jews and Muslims as two parties somehow against each other, when in reality, both groups suffer whenever racism in America goes unchecked
e. Portrays antisemitism as a means to an end - that cold, unfeeling Jews could not possibly understand the suffering of Muslims
Your suggestion that anyone offended by this is paid by some secretive corrupt cabal of globalist to do so...
If doesn't do any of that, and you clearly missed the point she was making. By a lot.
I didn't say you, or anyone is being paid to be offended. Is this your first day learning English? A PR campaign doesn't normally send checks to the people it targets, dumb ass.
Please educate me; who's sending the checks? Who's receiving them?
Do you know how marketing works? THEY'RE NOT SENDING PEOPLE CHECKS.
Do you not know how money works? What do you think well-funded means?
Holy shit dude. You're not smart.
Just say you don't know. It's fine. You said something that you thought sounded cool, but you didn't think about what it meant and then you had to save face by resorting to repeated ad hominem jabs. You'll be much happier in life if you just admit it.
My wife works in marketing, idiot. I know exactly how PR campaigns work. It seems you just don't know how to read, or have never had an actual job. Or both.
You've replied to my comment saying that this is a "well funded PR campaign." Yet you're flailing about and sputtering insults trying to explain how something can be "well-funded" but also no one is getting paid and no one is doing the paying. It doesn't make sense and you know it. So just admit it.
You know what, just put your wife on. At least I can talk to someone capable of making sense.
I'm going to explain this very slowly because it's increasingly clear that you're a complete numbskull:
A firm is hired by someone who wants to sell a product or promote a message. That firm's money comes from who-the-fuck-knows. They pay an agency to develop marketing material that's designed to amplify and intensify a message, all in an effort to sway consumers or interest groups. BP pays to make commercials that make them sound "green". The oil company does the paying, and the marketing firms get paid. Target pays to put out billboards that make them sound friendly and like they have the best deals. The retailer does the paying, and the marketing firms get paid.
A university pays to encourage enrollment. University pays marketing firm or ad agency. Political figures pay ad agencies to put out campaign ads. PACs pay ad agencies to put out emotional pleas to "stop socialist Biden" or "save Democracy". Fox News pays talking heads to sell messages and influence voters. The Koch Brothers fund campy TV shows to sell messages and influence voters. Right-wing activists pay literally tens of millions of dollars to YouTube content creators to sell messages and influence voters. Pro-Israel groups spend literally hundreds of millions of dollars to ad agencies and marketing firms to sell messages and influence voters.
Whoever-the-fuck has something they want to promote, they pay someone to put out material at a cadence that will grab people's attention, elicit strong reactions, and hopefully go "viral" and start being amplified by the rest of the media ecosystem so that John Q. Public hears a coordinated cacophony of self-reinforcing messages. The consumers don't get paid to be outraged or flattered. Consumers don't get paid to do literally anything. No one is paying you. You've literally been talking about Susan fucking Sarandon for days because you're so fucking bent out of shape you can't even sleep at night. And that might very well be because someone paid to put this outrage bait in front of your nose, because they knew you'd cream your fucking pants over it.
Now shut the actual fuck up and go away. I can't fucking believe I had to explain how a goddamned commercial works to a dipshit on the internet today. Gods help us all.
I can't believe how far you've missed the point. You are accusing Jews of being upset over a comment that minimizes antisemitism because some nefarious scheming cabal has paid to make people feel that way. You still don't realize how antisemitic that is. You still don't realize that you are the one being targeted and manipulated.
I have challenged you to pause and actually think critically about the wildly unfounded accusation you made. You responded with repeated insults and weird stalking, staunchly falling short of the task. You still haven't come up with any plausible firm or individual paid to "generate outrage," nor an organization paying, nor a smoking gun ad, paid social media campaign, nor commercial, nor any mechanism that this supposed money was used to supposedly influence people.
You're grasping at straws now with vague handwaving at everyone's favorite boogeyman, AIPAC, which spends about 1/1000th as much as each of Saudi Arabia or Qatar.. Israel doesn't even crack the top 10.
I'm finished trying to lead you by the hand to the conclusion that you made an unfounded claim, based in part on antisemitic messaging you have been unknowingly exposed to.
Jews are scared and under physical attack. around. the world. It's not something that started in the past six weeks. It is harmful when millionaire public figures minimize or justify antisemitism.
You clearly don't get it, won't get it, and have no interest in getting it. Here's a list of charities helping Israelis and Palestinians. Stop wasting your breath insulting a vulnerable minority and go do some good.
What did she say? The few quotes I've found so far don't seem to line up with what you are suggesting.
This reeks of a well-funded and orchestrated PR campaign to neuter Israel criticism at all cost. They're really grasping at straws here, and I get the feeling that if the outrage doesn't stick they'll suddenly stop talking about her at all and start stockpiling their money/energy for the next semi-tone deaf comment they can twist into a chest-thumping crusade against "antisemitism".
In this case, it looks more like it's Streisand effecting. (Affecting?)
The way I remember that Affect is active. You affect things. Effect is passive, and is the result of something. Affect is a verb (and I think sometimes can be a descriptor). Effect is always a noun. So you can have the resulting effect of an experiment, but if you mess with some variables, you have affected the effect.
Though, in this case, you're turning the noun into a verb, so you could make the case for either use I think. If you hyphenate it though you can leave it as is without thought. "Streisand-effecting.
Years ago I had a CEO of the company I worked at make a similar comment; "affect/effect. No one really knows which one to use." So my contrarian, anti-authority ass just looked it up right then and decided to always know.
According to what I've read just now, she said that amid the vile attacks against Jews in America "people that are afraid of being Jewish at this time are getting a taste of what it feels like to be a Muslim in this country."
This: a. Minimizes the violence against Jews and Jewish Gathering places right now b. Makes Jewish suffering secondary to the "real" suffering of Muslims c. Denies the tragic history of antisemitism in America d. Pits Jews and Muslims as two parties somehow against each other, when in reality, both groups suffer whenever racism in America goes unchecked e. Portrays antisemitism as a means to an end - that cold, unfeeling Jews could not possibly understand the suffering of Muslims
Your suggestion that anyone offended by this is paid by some secretive corrupt cabal of globalist to do so...
If doesn't do any of that, and you clearly missed the point she was making. By a lot.
I didn't say you, or anyone is being paid to be offended. Is this your first day learning English? A PR campaign doesn't normally send checks to the people it targets, dumb ass.
Please educate me; who's sending the checks? Who's receiving them?
Do you know how marketing works? THEY'RE NOT SENDING PEOPLE CHECKS.
Do you not know how money works? What do you think well-funded means?
Holy shit dude. You're not smart.
Just say you don't know. It's fine. You said something that you thought sounded cool, but you didn't think about what it meant and then you had to save face by resorting to repeated ad hominem jabs. You'll be much happier in life if you just admit it.
My wife works in marketing, idiot. I know exactly how PR campaigns work. It seems you just don't know how to read, or have never had an actual job. Or both.
You've replied to my comment saying that this is a "well funded PR campaign." Yet you're flailing about and sputtering insults trying to explain how something can be "well-funded" but also no one is getting paid and no one is doing the paying. It doesn't make sense and you know it. So just admit it.
You know what, just put your wife on. At least I can talk to someone capable of making sense.
I'm going to explain this very slowly because it's increasingly clear that you're a complete numbskull:
A firm is hired by someone who wants to sell a product or promote a message. That firm's money comes from who-the-fuck-knows. They pay an agency to develop marketing material that's designed to amplify and intensify a message, all in an effort to sway consumers or interest groups. BP pays to make commercials that make them sound "green". The oil company does the paying, and the marketing firms get paid. Target pays to put out billboards that make them sound friendly and like they have the best deals. The retailer does the paying, and the marketing firms get paid. A university pays to encourage enrollment. University pays marketing firm or ad agency. Political figures pay ad agencies to put out campaign ads. PACs pay ad agencies to put out emotional pleas to "stop socialist Biden" or "save Democracy". Fox News pays talking heads to sell messages and influence voters. The Koch Brothers fund campy TV shows to sell messages and influence voters. Right-wing activists pay literally tens of millions of dollars to YouTube content creators to sell messages and influence voters. Pro-Israel groups spend literally hundreds of millions of dollars to ad agencies and marketing firms to sell messages and influence voters.
Whoever-the-fuck has something they want to promote, they pay someone to put out material at a cadence that will grab people's attention, elicit strong reactions, and hopefully go "viral" and start being amplified by the rest of the media ecosystem so that John Q. Public hears a coordinated cacophony of self-reinforcing messages. The consumers don't get paid to be outraged or flattered. Consumers don't get paid to do literally anything. No one is paying you. You've literally been talking about Susan fucking Sarandon for days because you're so fucking bent out of shape you can't even sleep at night. And that might very well be because someone paid to put this outrage bait in front of your nose, because they knew you'd cream your fucking pants over it.
Now shut the actual fuck up and go away. I can't fucking believe I had to explain how a goddamned commercial works to a dipshit on the internet today. Gods help us all.
Edit: Well look what we have here. I'm not surprised you're weak in the knees about some dumb shit Susan fucking Sarandon said at a rally. You're literally the target audience for this kind of outrage bait.
Newsflash - You are being played like a fiddle.
I can't believe how far you've missed the point. You are accusing Jews of being upset over a comment that minimizes antisemitism because some nefarious scheming cabal has paid to make people feel that way. You still don't realize how antisemitic that is. You still don't realize that you are the one being targeted and manipulated.
I have challenged you to pause and actually think critically about the wildly unfounded accusation you made. You responded with repeated insults and weird stalking, staunchly falling short of the task. You still haven't come up with any plausible firm or individual paid to "generate outrage," nor an organization paying, nor a smoking gun ad, paid social media campaign, nor commercial, nor any mechanism that this supposed money was used to supposedly influence people.
You're grasping at straws now with vague handwaving at everyone's favorite boogeyman, AIPAC, which spends about 1/1000th as much as each of Saudi Arabia or Qatar.. Israel doesn't even crack the top 10.
I'm finished trying to lead you by the hand to the conclusion that you made an unfounded claim, based in part on antisemitic messaging you have been unknowingly exposed to.
Jews are scared and under physical attack. around. the world. It's not something that started in the past six weeks. It is harmful when millionaire public figures minimize or justify antisemitism.
You clearly don't get it, won't get it, and have no interest in getting it. Here's a list of charities helping Israelis and Palestinians. Stop wasting your breath insulting a vulnerable minority and go do some good.
Hand In Hand Schools
Oxfam
Doctors without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF)
IsraAID
Save the Children