Not huge, indeed. It is possible, and desirable, that the EU is playing strategy with them. Maybe they hit softly now, just to show they mean to go on this regulation-path they choose, and to give a “warning”. Maybe they considered a too aggressive fine could make things worse. I’m not sure, just thinking.
Honesty and straightforwardness are no more part of the journalistic typical speech. They are mostly busy to be presentable, even when their job suffers from this.
Me inscribí a Feddit esperando encontrar gente mas inteligente y no los mismos gusanos que infestan Facebook. Evidentemente me equivocaba.
Very good article.
I’d shoot myself rather than using Airbnb again.
Thank you! According to your explication of memes, which I agree on, the whole thing would be quite sad and risky, socially speaking. Because it means we all would be giving away our ability to pick a very specific term for an already-existent one, possibly since the second option is just cheaper, in terms of effort. This regardless that the one we chose is not the most suitable and could even be misleading, included “sanewashining”. For example, people reading that Meta is trying to buy Trump’s goodwill will be probably more gentle in judging Meta, while the journalust goal was maybe to describe how Meta is a dangerous company (if it wasnt his, it is surely mine). This specific attempt partially failed, of course. So “sane-washing” is in itself a sane-washing term to indicate a more or less serious kind of misinformation. In this sense, smaller newspapers are more likely to avoid this linguistic simplification, since they are probably less controlled by statal agencies (maybe I am wrong?). I appreciate very much your insight, and though I know everyone is biased, I will take a look at your suggestions.