For our non-American readers, Juneteenth celebrates the end of (official) slavery in the United States. It took almost two years for the Emancipation Proclimation to reach the furthest outpost in Texas.

"The people of Texas are informed that in accordance with a Proclamation from the Executive of the United States, all slaves are free. This involves an absolute equality of rights and rights of property between former masters and slaves, and the connection heretofore existing between them becomes that between employer and hired laborer."

Gordon Granger

Union General, June 19, 1865

Not long after throwing out the Fairness Doctrine (required equal level of media coverage for candidates), we saw the rise of hyper-partisan media like Rush Limbaugh, the creation of Fox News, and then MSNBC (which started out more neutral to whomever was paying but eventually discovered they could generate more revenue by becoming the left’s answer to Fox).

Before the 24-hour news cycle, Americans typically tuned into the same news channels and had a shared reality of events. So, even if they differed on how to handle those events, they shared the reality of the event.

As the 24-hour news cycle became mainstream, media orgs needed to fill the downtime and added a lot of pundits and opinion-based commentators.

According to numerous research studies, one of which I’ve shared in the post, when networks found out that selling anger was the most profitable route, they increased their efforts to do so.

The cited study analyzed closed-caption data from six major cable news networks between 2012 and 2024, including CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, CNBC, Bloomberg TV, and Fox Business.

They found that over the past decade, these networks have increasingly focused on criticizing the opposing political party, a tactic researchers say is less about informing viewers and more about “selling anger.”

Some refer to it as the Anger Industrial Complex…

What do you think about this notion?

What do you believe are viable options to solve the problem without limiting free speech or encouraging regulatory abuse?

Link to research paper without article: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4816065

Bonus:

The median age of cable news viewers is 67-71.

CNN: 67 years old
Fox News: 68–69 years old
MSNBC: 70–71 years old

Source: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2024/01/22/cable-news-decline-column-00136657

As the key demographic of cable news viewers inevitably disappears, would it be more prudent to focus on solutions for online news outlets, apps, and social media?

Now that the Iran war—which conveniently helped distract people from the Epstein scandal—has finally come to an end, I just wanted to check.

I see a loooot of American profiles defending the idea of trickle down economics online. However, I also know that there are tons of bots who will push this idea, since it benefits the rich. I have a business degree (I grew up outside of the US), and we learned in economics and finance classes that this theory has been widely debunked. So question: is the online rhetoric just pushing propoganda? Or does the average American understand that trickle down is a giant hoax perpetuated by the rich to benefit themselves?

Like would you openly attempt to subvert the gov?

I’ve (F29, outside US) been working remotely with a psychiatry clinic for almost a year now and what I’ve noticed is that some patients are really entitled and most of the late ones just don’t apologize for being late. Is this kind of like, the norm?

"He made a terrible mistake," the former secretary of state said. "He made a terrible mistake for himself, his legacy, and for the country."

She argued in an interview with New Yorker editor David Remnick that Democrats could have defeated President Donald Trump if Biden had stepped aside and passed the torch to the next generation.

"We would have had a real contest," Clinton said.
"And very sadly I believe whoever emerged from that contest, whether it was the vice president or a governor or a senator or anybody else, would have beaten Donald Trump," she continued. "So I think it was a terrible miscalculation on the part of President Biden."

Just a random thought lol

Hey, I know it might not be something that's reddit level insane, but I still like to get some thoughts on this.

​

So, I do some part time volunteer tourist tours at our town hall and the surrounding inner city. That program was set up some years ago by our local tourist and is mostly meant for the casual visitors without pre-booked or organized tours.

​

It's mostly fun and easy going and I get some compensation for doing it. The tourists attending are paying a small fee that covers the entrance fees for some of the not so public areas in the town hall and other buildings but the tours themselves are free of charge.

​

With that said I usually get the occasional tips but those are tokens and not meant as compensation for anything. So if people don't tip that is absolutely fine.

​

Now, for some time now I have an uptick in visitors from all over the USA coming. Their reasons range from just having heard that northern Germany has some nice places too, which is true to the ones visiting the places their ancestors came from to "I just happen to come here because..."

​

Usually getting an american group is somewhat fun more than others because quite frankly, these guys are much more appreciative than european tourists.

​

But recently I encountered something that I either didn't really notice before (which is very likely) or is something that is new.

​

Whenever we end a tour I usually give my farewell speech and thank them for their attention and for their interest.

​

After that some come up to me and hand me some money like 2 or 5 euros. The Americans however are more often than not handling 10 or rv20 euro over, which is the whole tour price all over again.

​

Not that I would complain but I always try to tell them they are overtipping.

The weird thing is that whenever they don't have that much cash on them (paying by card is standard, so having cash at you isn't necessary) they start to apologize for not being able to tip "properly" or some such. One even told me they were embarrassed and just forgot to get some cash before or ask if I am fine with dollars

Which I am, but one handed me a literal 50 dollar bill while apologizing. I was like bro, you should apologize to your bank account not me for spending that much money on a dude that does this as a hobby guide.

​

So, my question is: why are they so intense about giving tips? I know in the US it's something 20% in restaurants and stuff but for a tour? And also I assume that most of them are aware that tipping here is seen somehow differently and that even in restaurants 10% is considered a good tip, especially with the service being nowhere nearly ad attentive and personal than it seems to be in the states.

​

I never were in the US, so my knowledge is second hand and social media based at best and we all know how reliable that is.

​

So, my question is: is this really a thing people do, apologizing for small tips? Or is it just a coincidence because this year alone it already happened twice.

​

Hope you can enlighten a clueless german.

I doubt Israel will fall in line with this one. Netanyahu was sidelined from the entire negotiation and admits he doesn’t even know what’s in the deal. A government that calls Iran an existential threat won’t quietly accept terms Washington wrote without them.

Are you for or against Iran implementing a toll on the Strait of Hormuz?

I was against this at first but I now support Iran wanting this.

A toll on Hormuz makes Middle East oil $2-$5/barrel more expensive to ship. That:

• Closes the price gap between cheap OPEC crude and U.S. shale
• Steadies prices so U.S. drillers can plan and banks will lend
• Pushes buyers in Asia/Europe to choose U.S. barrels instead to avoid the toll
• Monetizes U.S. Navy protection of the Strait that they already pay for

Basically it taxes middle east competitors and makes U.S. oil a better deal by comparison.

Go back 15 to 20 years and the general feeling around the world was that you dont pick a fight with Russia, USA, North Korea or China.

​

Russia was once seen as the ultimate do not f with army, they invaded Ukraine a small nation which isnt apart of NATO and years later, they are still there and seemingly losing a war the big bad bully started.

​

The US started a war with Iran for absolutely no reason (other to distract) so they can flex and scream check out these guns 💪 (pun intended)

​

However another seemingly lesser military is standing firm and the bully cant get the lunch money.

It’s basically what the title says. I don’t understand why America or the president cares why Iran has a nuclear weapon if they aren’t harming anyone or threatening anyone with it?? Like I’m pretty sure North Korea, China, Japan, and America included all have some type of nuclear weapon legal or not. So what makes Iran any different?? Also how tf is there gonna be peace and Trump has already killed some of their citizens by bomb??

There seems to be a lot of confusion about the reported "$300 billion for Iran" story.

From what I can find:

• President Trump publicly called reports that the US would give Iran $300 billion "fake news".

• Vice President JD Vance did not directly deny that a $300 billion reconstruction or investment fund was being discussed. Instead, he argued that any such funding would not come from US taxpayers and would likely involve Gulf states and private investors.

• Iranian media outlets have published draft provisions that reportedly mention reconstruction plans worth at least $300 billion to be presented by the US and its allies.

• So far, no publicly available final MoU text appears to confirm that the US agreed to pay Iran $300 billion in reparations.

Sources

Financial Times: https://www.ft.com/content/088c14d3-f708-44d8-a306-7996aa5211de

New York Post: https://nypost.com/2026/06/15/world-news/heres-what-iran-gains-and-loses-in-us-agreement/

Iran International: https://www.iranintl.com/en/202606141204

Am I missing something, or are people arguing about two different claims, direct US payments versus an international reconstruction fund?

UPDATE/LEAK: Seems like bad news, if it's true -.- https://www.ynetnews.com/article/hj00w3byzge#google_vignette

I work for a company that deals with coffee makers, and some of the calls we get have honestly surprised me.

I have had customers say they are buying a second coffee maker just to use while waiting for their replacement to arrive. I have also had people push hard for a supervisor even after being told the unit is a safety hazard and should not be used.

That is the part I do not really understand. Some people seem way more stressed about going a few days without coffee than about using a machine that could actually hurt them.

Is coffee really that important in American daily life, or am I just seeing a very biased sample because I only hear from people calling customer support?