Jay Pinho

@jaypinho

💻 | | 🌍American in London. Occasional hiker with . 📝Sometimes I write: .

London
Vrijeme pridruživanja: siječanj 2009.

Tweetovi

Blokirali ste korisnika/cu @jaypinho

Jeste li sigurni da želite vidjeti te tweetove? Time nećete deblokirati korisnika/cu @jaypinho

  1. Prikvačeni tweet
    26. lip 2019.

    Sign up for my newsletter! I write about (ad) tech, policy, and politics. . Bonus points: you get to reply to the emails and tell me how wrong I am.

    Poništi
  2. 31. sij

    Reading the Rubio, Alexander, and Murkowski statements in quick succession is really something. There's not even much of an attempt at logical cohesion or a defense of their actions. They all read like hostage statements.

    Poništi
  3. 31. sij

    Has ever successfully delivered a package to its intended destination? If so, I've yet to see proof.

    Poništi
  4. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    29. sij

    So last night I was on and I realized I don't know how to communicate how constitutionally dangerous the Senate situation is right now. We're not arguing over what Trump did. We're arguing over whether Republicans *want to know* what Trump did.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  5. 29. sij

    is freaking out about Chrome's 3P cookie changes. But Chrome's upcoming Referer policy release in mid-March is a dark horse in terms of impact for brand safety measurement (especially if your URL detection mostly occurs within iframes):

    Poništi
  6. 28. sij

    The reporting about whether 4 Republicans will vote for witnesses or not is incredibly contradictory right now. Everyone's interpreting the same McConnell comment differently.

    Poništi
  7. 28. sij

    I actually agree with much of the George Packer essay, but my god, if there ever were true Enemies of Writing, passages like this have to be top of the list. Pretty gross to recast the narcissism of minor differences over a catastrophe they both supported as somehow valuable.

    Poništi
  8. 28. sij

    I can't help but think about this piece in NYMag from last April: . Seems like a distressing pattern.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  9. 28. sij

    my favorite scene in Spotlight was when Marty Baron pulled aside Michael Rezendes and told him it was a real lack of judgment to pursue the story and that he was hurting the institution by doing it

    Poništi
  10. 28. sij
    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  11. proslijedio/la je Tweet

    Nuking the filibuster is just a rule change to return the Senate to its original form. Adding seats to SCOTUS and admitting new states = legislation. None of it is unprecedented, all of it is necessary for progressive goals. The idea that it can’t be done is legislative NIMBYism.

    Poništi
  12. 27. sij

    If Trump were actually convicted by the Senate, can he run for reelection? If not, what would happen, especially if one or more state primaries have already taken place?

    Poništi
  13. 27. sij
    Poništi
  14. 26. sij

    That's some quality grade-A shade right there.

    Poništi
  15. 25. sij

    looks like MS Word's added a new fact-checker feature

    Poništi
  16. 25. sij

    Adam Schiff quoted a CBS News article. If you're mad, get mad at CBS. Or the guy CBS quoted in the piece. It's genuinely insane that the press is treating this outrage as a real thing that Democrats should care about. And predictably, plenty of Democrats have fallen for it.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  17. 25. sij

    One useful shorthand for determining whether an outrage episode is real is whether its causes can be easily explained. If the logic for being mad is so convoluted that even the "outraged" can't be bothered to step through their thought process, it's probably fake.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  18. proslijedio/la je Tweet

    Reporters know Schiff proved his case. They know Trump is guilty. If Republicans acquit him anyhow, it indicts the whole party. It's hard for journalists to process doing unbiased reporting in a world where an entire party is guilty of a crime.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  19. 25. sij

    It would be useful for journalists to spend some time thinking about what they're trying to convey to a broad readership, instead of robotically filing faux-naive stories that do little or nothing to expound on what's actually going on.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  20. 25. sij

    But they were always going to vote for acquittal. (Indeed, the same media that's credulously reported on the "outcry" have been predicting acquittal for months.) The GOP needs any pretext to make it look as if Schiff's line mattered at all. And the press is helping them do it.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  21. 25. sij

    And btw, we see this type of behavior over and over again from the national political press. Look at the current "outcry" over Adam Schiff's "head on a pike" line: . Same thing: everyone pretends this is a key moment that may sway Rs towards acquittal.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi

Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.

Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.

    Možda bi vam se svidjelo i ovo:

    ·