during the day when people were not watching, some bad guys stole oil, they wanted to sell it to others and make money, but when people found out about it, they started buying oil again, so the price went up. They also bought some tech companies' stocks, making their price go up too.

The people who control the money decided to make it a little bit cheaper to borrow, so people were not so scared anymore and they bought even more tech companies' stocks, making their price go up even more.

Some countries in Asia like Japan and Australia were doing okay, but in China, people were worried and started selling their stocks, making their prices go down a lot.

In Europe, people were also buying and selling stocks, but not as much as in Asia.

People in the United States were buying and selling stocks too, but not as much as in Asia.

People were also trading things like gold, silver, and oil, and their prices went up and down a little bit.

And that's what happened while you were sleeping. Read from source...

"If I were to write about the "Streisand Effect," I would not include or emphasize some arguments that were made." - (Feeble minded, you, and that others may not be aware, not immune from cognitive biases.)

The article also made a lot of sense, despite any inconsistencies, which shouldn't matter in this context. It's not a research paper but an opinionated critique on Barrett's article.

The article does not cite any evidence for the claim that "the right-wing press gave an 'inordinate amount' of coverage to the transphobic comments", or the claim that "the left-wing press gave an 'inordinate amount' of coverage to the Transphobic comments."

Both the claims are assumptions made without evidence, that would likely make the claims incorrect or misleading.

For example, for the claim that "the right-wing press gave an 'inordinate amount' of coverage to the transphobic comments", the article provided no data to back up this claim.

The article mentions "a growing backlash against the leftist press for their role in amplifying the negative coverage." - This is not supported by any evidence.

The article mentioned "a growing backlash against the right-wing press for their role in amplifying the negative coverage." - This is not supported by any evidence.

"The right-wing press is more likely to give coverage to the Transphobic comments." - This is not supported by any evidence.

"The left-wing press is more likely to give coverage to the Transphobic comments." - This is not supported by any evidence.

"The article concludes that the media has been hypocritical in its coverage of the Transphobic comments, and that it has played a significant role in amplifying the controversy." - This is not supported by any evidence.

The article makes claims without any evidence to back them up, such as "The right-wing press is more likely to give coverage to the Transphobic comments."

"The article argues that the right-wing press has given an 'inordinate amount' of coverage to the Transphobic comments, while the left-wing press has given an 'inordinate amount' of coverage to the Transphobic comments." - This is not supported by any evidence.

The article is a poorly written opinion piece, it has no evidence to support its claims, and the author's arguments are inconsistent and irrational.

Neutral

To see more information about the sentiment of this article, please sign in.

If you're new, you can create an account by visiting the following link:

Create Account

Investing carries certain risks, including fluctuations in market prices and potential loss of capital. The information on this website is not directed towards residents of the United States or individuals who are subject to United States jurisdiction. It is intended for distribution and use by persons in jurisdictions in which the distribution or use of such information is allowed under applicable laws and regulations. Any relevant investment advice provided by AI on this website has been prepared for informational purposes only and is not intended to constitute legal, tax, accounting, or any other form of financial advice. Before investing, users must conduct their own research and consult with their advisors. The information on this website is not directed towards residents of the United States or individuals who are subject to United States jurisdiction. It is intended for distribution and use by persons in jurisdictions in which the distribution or use of such information is allowed under applicable laws and regulations. Any relevant investment advice provided by AI on this website has been prepared for informational purposes only and is not intended to constitute legal, tax, accounting, or any other form of financial advice. Before investing, users must conduct their own research and consult with their advisors.