688
Trump Suddenly Looks Very Afraid of Being Sued by Taylor Swift
(newrepublic.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2024
688 points (98.3% liked)
politics
19248 readers
2091 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Given everything going on in this country and Trump's ability to turn everything he touches shit, I almost think Swift has to respond to this at some point. I'm surprised she hasn't already. I understand her desire to stay out of politics. But speaking out and denouncing this and everything about Trump isn't her getting into politics. It's her having to because Trump dragged her into it kicking and screaming.
She can't stop those images from circulating. But the more they circulate, the more chances that at least some people think they're real. Or at the very least, they may interpret her silence as a tacit endorsement. Some may even consider her a Trump supporter, especially those who don't follow either her or politics closely enough to know that while she's never taken an official political position, she's proudly left leaning. Either way, those pictures have a very high likelihood of causing reputational (and, by extension, financial) harm by alienating a chunk of her fan base who may think she endorses his viewpoints. Especially when paired with his post implying she endorsed him.
Are those pictures even still up on his feed? I'm not going on that mall-restroom Twitter knockoff of his to check. I was half-surprised not to see her legal team have a C&D letter sent to him with his early morning McDonalds the next morning, a public statement by lunch, and a lawsuit filed against him for implying she endorsed him by the time the courtrooms had closed. I would fucking love to see Trump try to bully down Taylor fucking Swift's legal team. You could put that shit on pay per view and eliminate the national debt.
She did respond and said she wanted to wait until after her tour so her fans were safe. She is definitely alluding to an endorsement as well.
Here is the quote:
"Let me be very clear: I am not going to speak about something publicly if I think doing so might provoke those who would want to harm the fans who come to my shows," Swift wrote. "In cases like this one, 'silence' is actually showing restraint, and waiting to express yourself at a time when it’s right to.”
https://www.themarysue.com/taylor-swift-owes-us-nothing/
When is her tour over?
Edit:
Welp, either she changes her mind or it'll be too late to do anything.
Maybe she just wants to stay out of it. I think that's responsible since Meal Team 6/Y'all Qaeda attacking her fans is a real possibility.
For sure, her quotes though seemed to Indicate to me that she wanted to voice her opinion but not until she could do it without affecting her tour
I mean, at the same time, I think it’s entirely rational to fear that Trump will attempt to gin up some stochastic terrorism targeted at not only her, but her audience. In that context, how she’s playing it is kinda just the best possible play.
All I am saying is that if she wants to use her platform to encourage voting for Democrats, she cannot do so in time for it to make any difference in the election, if she waits until her tour is over.
Yeah I think this shows her true colors. She could act now, and likely have a genuine impact. But instead "doing this might hurt concert sales so I'll wait until the end of the tour which oh btw would be after the election tehe"
Ah yes the famous "let the terrorists frighten you into silence" strategy
That's bullshit. Just because it's not convenient for our political strategy doesn't mean she has to risk her safety or the safety of her fans by further involving herself.
If she speaks out against the maniacal right there is a greater than zero chance that many innocent people other than her will be hurt. It would not be the first time.
She doesn’t have to do anything and I wouldn’t really expect her to take the Dead Kennedys approach. It makes it clear though, how politics in this country have gotten to where they are when those who make a play for power through force can command the narrative unopposed like that
It is bullshit that the right wing has used the fear of political violence to chill free expression, yes.
I understand Ms Swift might prioritize the safety of her fans and her self, but the fact remains that that is a decision made in response to threats of terrorism (real or imagined, but definitely plausible)
She's just another fucking billionaire worried about her dollars above all else. Half of her fans are the part of the fascist cult that's ruining the US. If she were to denounce him, that would cut into her profits. having more dollars on top of a billion is just more important to her.
Hahahhahaa this is the same old neoliberal handwaving. She’s a republican. Look at her bank account.
Funny how she has already denounced Trump years ago. She has never liked him, endorsed him, or approved of him. There is video of her shit talking him to her parents and managers.
She's a billionaire. She's no more left leaning than Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos. She just flies socially progressive flags.
She made a billion by selling tickets to huge venues all over the world where she performed.
She actually did work to get rich, unlike Bezos, who steals his wealth from his workers.
I guarantee she exploits people like any other capitalist, but there are different types of billionaires.
Rowling used to seem like a "good billionaire" too. Then she went all TERF-y.
Swift may seem cool for now, but let's not put away the guillotines just yet.
Not if you read her work, she didn’t. It was filled with racist tropes.
I am just starting to see that, after having grown up on it. Any recommendations on good analysis's?
I'm a fan of Alton Brown and Kenji López-Alt
Americas test kitchen/cooks country is great. Internet shaquille is also excellent.
I love you.
I'm fine with that. The guillotine can always stay our regardless of who it is and.how much we currently like them.
Okay? Everyone seems fine until they don't seem fine. That's not unique to billionaires or particularly insightful.
No one's canonizing anyone here. Saying there's a difference between "one of the most popular musicians ever" having a lot of money and "exploitative businessman notable for particularly exploitative working situations" who has two orders of magnitude more isn't some preening hero worship.
I'd say that her bonus payout to her tour staff shows that isn't the case.
I'd argue there's a pretty big difference between someone like Bezos and someone like swift. Specifically, it's almost impossible to make a billion dollar business without exploiting people, and Bezos definitely exploited the hell out of people.
In contrast, I don't think it would be accurate to say that Swift made her money by exploiting people. Of the ethical ways to make money, I would think selling albums that you wrote and performed, and tickets to concerts that you're performing would rank pretty highly.
Additionally, a significant portion of her wealth is the valuation of her music catalog being extremely high on account of being a very popular musician.
I'm not saying she's the most left person in the world or anything, but not aggressively exploiting people, giving a lot of money to charities, and actively championing progressive causes definitely classifies someone as "left leaning" in my book.
Billionaires should not exist, full stop. They literally cannot spend that amount of money.
She could lower the cost of her music, her tour tickets, merchandise...
I love Taylor Swift too but just because she has progressive views doesn't mean she didn't extract wealth from people and is hoarding it for herself.
I'm willing to eat my hat if she donates 2/3 of her wealth right now and promises to never have more than a few million in total assets.
But she isn't. And that makes her a bad billionaire.
If she lowered the price of her tour tickets it would just increase demand (without a commensurate increase in supply, since concert venue size and the number of shows she has time to put on both have limits) and thus further enable scalpers.
Lowering the prices of music sales or merch would be more feasible, but would be relatively complicated due to messing with supply/demand/product quality/employee & supplier compensation, etc. (For example, it could arguably be better to keep the merch prices the same or even raise them, but have the manufacturer increase worker wages or something like that.)
Rather than sit around hoping that she more fairly allocates profits of her own accord, if the societal goal is to prevent billionaires then the easiest way to ensure that would be via government policy, by increasing her income tax.
So, two things: I never said people should be billionaires, I said there's a difference between her and Bezos. You can't pretend that a $12 album, or Spotify streaming costs are the same as making people pee in jugs for minimum wage. One of them is actually doing things that people like in exchange for money, and people are saying "yes, I would like to spend my disposable income on this luxury good" often enough that she has more wealth than she can ever spend. Extracting wealth isn't the same as exploitation.
Second, if you exclude the value of her music catalog, she's not a billionaire. If she sold every piece of real property she owned, and gave away every last penny, he net worth would still be in excess of $500M on account of that. It doesn't seem quite fair to say that someone is terrible because the things they made are worth more than an arbitrary line of "a few million". Saying that someone is hoarding by just owning something they made that people say is worth a lot of money is judging someone for something largely out of their control.
None of this has anything to do with someone being "left leaning" in any case. Left leaning isn't some short hand for ethical purity of being a member of the proletariat or even the working class. Saying that someone who publicly and materially supports progressive causes is "left leaning" seems pretty fair and reasonable.
I don't particularly care about swift being some bastion of goodness. I also don't actually care if someone has a billion dollars. I do care if they exploited people to get it. I care if they exploited people to get less than a billion. So lumping people together by the number without focusing on the conduct misses the point.
Very well put
Edit: downvotes for agreeing with an upvoted comment is interesting
It's entirely possible that Taylor's legal team already got in touch, discreetly, and warned him to cut that shit out, or else she will unload a can of legal whoop-ass on him. She is under no obligation to endorse anyone. Whatever her political beliefs are, she may have made the purposeful choice to stay out of it. And she may not want to get involved in a lawsuit over this, unless she has to to protect her brand.
Which may also explain why now he "doesn't know anything about it". Denial is his go-to when he is caught.
I bet she could even argue that him forcing her to take a position publicly against him also constitutes financial harm, because of the possibility of it alienating any of her fans that were Trump supporters.
Right. He basically put her into a situation where whichever side she chose, she loses. It's one of the reasons she's never gotten involved publicly in politics. She's smart enough to know that she'll alienate a portion of her fans no matter which side she chooses, so as far as I can tell she preferred to just stay out of the whole thing and make all the fucking money.
And that's not a bad thing. Not every celebrity has to be a political activist, and people who go to any concert are looking to have a fun time, not attend a really loud political rally. And her position in all of this is to give a whole bunch of young people a place to go and shut their brains off for a night.
Counter argument: sometimes doing nothing is allowing evil to prevail.
Also "I just wanna shut my brain off and have fun without POLITICS" is not really a moral high ground. Many people can't avoid politics.
May I suggest stepping outside for a while. Unless you're actually involved in the job, a level of obsession to the point where you can't enjoy a night out without getting politics involved is unhealthy.
I think you missed my point or I communicated badly. If you are, for example, queer, being outside with your partner is considered political
taylor swift gets up on stage in front of tens of thousands of people on a regular basis. she doesn't have secret service protection for every public appearance.
draw whatever conclusions you want from those two facts.
She might be able to afford better security than the Secret Service.
So all she has to do is to arm swifties with automatic weapons? Problem solved... :D
She plays big stadiums & arenas. There aren’t really any slight lines to the stage that aren’t inside the facility. Trump was giving a speech in a field, with neighboring buildings outside the security perimeter.
TL;DR: Taylor Swift draws bigger crowds than Donald Trump, and is probably safer for it.
She also doesn't get up in front of her crowds and go on news programs and spew nothing but hate and lies that inspire violence.
I have no idea, but my wife says she thinks her and her boyfriend have a no politics pact.
That's fair too. Not everyone gives a shit about politics. I really didn't until Dementia DonOLD the racist rapist with 34 felonies got elected and made us the laughing stock of the world. I will say that throughout my life I've noticed things are noticeably better when we have a Democrat President.
Funny how that seems to be the case. But — and I'm OOTL here — I know Taylor dislikes Trump to the point of arguing with her parent's and managers about going public with that. I also hear her boyfriend and his family are Republicans. So it may be just to forestall a war between themselves or their fans, they both just agreed to sit politics out this year.
That would be really disappointing. Taylor shouldn't let her guy silence her. But I get it. My wife and I don't talk religion because she's religious and I'm vehemently atheist. It works. We have five kids and a happy marriage. Maybe that's all Taylor and whatshisname want, too.
Shes a Republican, of course she isn’t responding
Swift is most definitely not a Republican.