this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2025
760 points (99.7% liked)
Political Memes
9362 readers
2354 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Weren't they just aired quite publicly on the media?
Not for decades. Only very, very recently have they gotten any appreciable press because Trumps admin fucked this up so badly.
What stopped them from posting claims publicly on social media or online?
Why do you think you're hearing about it?
Because it was frequently in the press? There's no shortage of links to news reports & stories in the wikipedia articles on the victims, cases, topics.
And how did it get to the press?
Because the reporters did their job? You know these reports started before social media was mainstream, right?
So what is the point of questioning whether these women made their claims on social media or not?
You can read up, can't you? I didn't claim
So, I'm asking how that (apparent counterfactual) works. Does it withstand scrutiny?
I'm not saying you claimed anything. I'm asking what relevance there is as to whether the women made their claims on social media or not. I'm genuinely confused by the first comment of yours I replied to.
If anyone can pretty much publicize whatever they want online, then are billionaire media owners gagging their freedom of speech? I'm genuinely confused at your confusion.
The view that major, billionaire-owned journalism companies can gag anyone from exercising their freedom of speech like they're the only game in town seems outmoded when independent online media & journalism (where practically anyone can call themselves journalist) has disrupted that order since a while ago, and anyone can publish their words online in social media. That claim that may have made sense decades ago doesn't fit online media today.