I support the writer’s guild strike because they are not part of the bourgeoisie. The same can’t be said of a lot of these rich actors who own a ton of capital themselves. So on the one hand, it kind of seems like the bourgeoisie is fighting the bourgeoisie on this one. On the other hand, not every actor in the guild is as successful as Tom Cruise, so some of those striking actors are working class.

  • ImOnADiet@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Asking for other people to do the research for them, you can learn this info by reading or listening to like 1 news article

    • jkure2@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ok great yeah please go listen to the mainstream media to get your understanding of labor action 😵‍💫

      This is a question that a lot of less politically conscious people have, the answer is obvious if you know it, this place should be for sharing that information with people who are seeking it. Introductory info, 101, no??

      • ImOnADiet@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Get your opinion? No, but mainstream media will present most of the basic facts if you actually read the article, they tend to just deceptively edit headlines and shit with stuff that’s harder to lie about like this, it’s not ike this is news about the war or anything

        Edit: like this is 6 paragraphs down in the nbc article, it should lead you not to make assumptions like the guild is just rich actors or something:

        SAG-AFTRA was formed in 2012 after the merger of the Screen Actors Guild (founded in 1933) and the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists. The combined guild represents roughly 160,000 performers, from Oscar-winning A-list stars, such as Tom Hanks and Meryl Streep, to radio personalities and television presenters.

        • jkure2@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The whole point of a 101 community is to propagandize to people who are interested in leftist politics.

          If you are sending people to the sixth paragraph of an NBC news article instead of just answering the question with leftist spin (i.e. extra truth that nbc leaves out), you have totally missed the point.

          Especially when you have a big issue that’s hot in the news that has generates more interest than normal.

          • ImOnADiet@lemmygrad.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            It’s not that asking “is supporting [x] union the right move?” is bad, it’s that the framing of the question implied that famous actors make up a significant amount of the union. I don’t see how you come to that conclusion if you’ve done any sort of cursory reading or listening into the topic. This isnt even communsim101, it’s like media literacy 101 to just look into a situation for like at least 5 minutes to get extremely basic facts. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask people to do that before posting

            edit: further, what truth is nbc leaving out with regards to this question? If they were asking if the 100k+ poorer actors were just throwing a temper tantrum and turning down a good deal, I would get it, they have uncritically been repeating studio exec lies, but essentially they asked a question that the lib media themselves is not even trying to lie about

            • jkure2@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              The giant lib media companies are literally intermingled with the exact same capitalists that run the studios and streaming services that the actors are striking against. I cannot understand why anyone would think it’s a good idea to send obviously newbie people to go read what they have to say about it, even if one article you have found doesn’t exhibit obvious lies.

              Maybe it’s because I’m a big sports person too, and often see how people react whenever those unions act? The average American has no concept of this. People literally see this and think ‘oh wow tom cruise thinks he should make even more money, screw him give me back my shows’. That’s a real thing lots of people think in America! That’s the kind of thought pattern you get after uncritically living within the mainstream media ecosystem in America. It’s not the person deceptively framing the question, it’s the person relating the question through the lens they have been made to have by living in that ecosystem.

              When I say ‘mainstream’ I don’t mean it in the qannon conspiracy way, I mean these companies are literally owned and operated by the capitalists you are fighting against. They are absolutely not apolitical actors. Why would you expect them to report on this fairly? Is it even fair to put that info in the sixth paragraph instead of the second?

              It’s an own goal to send people there instead of explaining to them why the common perception of these ‘rich people unions’ is complete bunk.