IMO it's fully decorated to say "I was taught that if you don't have anything nice to say about someone, don't say anything. For that reason, I will not be talking about Charlie Kirk."
merc
They also know that a lot of really old people have no idea what's on their cable bill and just pay when it arrives, even if they never watch Fox News.
It used to be that advertiser boycotts sometimes worked. They even worked on Fox News in the past. In 2009 all it took for a boycott against Glenn Beck was for him to say that Obama was racist. That resulted in a huge advertiser boycott, which then resulted in them cancelling his show. In 2017 advertisers pulled out of Bill O'Reilly's show, but it wasn't his hateful views that resulted in the boycott, it was the sexual misconduct allegations. Tucker Carlson's show was cancelled eventually too, there were some advertiser boycotts, but it really seemed like what hurt Fox was that they lost a defamation case that he caused and it cost them nearly $1 billion.
OTOH, often boycotts don't work. The boycott against Laura Ingraham didn't seem to work. Her show is still on the air. She was forced to apologize though. Jeanine Pirro was lightly punished with her attacks on Ilhan Omar, but her show was never cancelled. It stayed on the air until she became (and it's hard to believe this is real) the US Attorney for DC.
It seems like sometimes a loss of money works. But, it seems to work better if it's a defamation suit vs. an advertiser boycott. Still, an ad boycott might help.
Here are some lists of who advertises on Fox News:
And it's useful to have specific labels so you can understand when they're fighting each-other, and perhaps encourage that.
Ah, yes, someone shows you have no ability to understand logic and they're a "Charlie wannabe try hard".
Of course it's a threat, it's just not a direct threat that you're legally allowed to respond to with violence.
So, you think he literally knows your name and plotted to kill your specific family? Are you really that deluded?
The fact that you're unable to understand logic means that I've failed? Ok.
So, you tolerate people who are intolerant?
So, you disagree with the meme?
I'm not addressing the "most basic foundation of human interaction" or anything. I'm addressing this pretend solution to the paradox of tolerance. You know, logic? Ever heard of it?
The idea that people ever say anything on the Internet that the whole world can see, and do it in their own name, seems ridiculous to me.
If something is in my real name, it's only for work purposes, like say Linked In. And in that case I'm only ever posting there if I need a job or something.
I wouldn't talk about my favourite sports team, let alone anything political, if it were in my own name.