- May 3, 2016
- 9,019
- 5,331
I suck at telling an extreme position from sarcasm, do you really find it horrific, or are you being sarcastic?absolutely horrific...i'll be boycotting him from here on out...that's inexcusable.
I suck at telling an extreme position from sarcasm, do you really find it horrific, or are you being sarcastic?absolutely horrific...i'll be boycotting him from here on out...that's inexcusable.
witch hunt? Like burning witches? Salem style?Strange wording... poor taste. But not something worth having a witch hunt over..
I didn't expect Seravalli to back off the words at all... the guy is kind of obnoxiously stubborn.
I don't care who he cheers for...he's obviously a garbage reporter. Canceled. Done.Cassie Campbell's husband is an AGM with the Flames and she openly pulls for them all the time. Kelly Hrudey is near tears with every Flames loss.
Frank sucks and is an idiot but fandom shouldn't get someone cancelled.
clear as mudPeople get offended easily. That’s a nothing-burger of a comment.
Now had he said, “with a little help from THE LOSS OF Gaudreau….”, that would’ve been pretty horrible.
It’s pretty clear he meant in a guardian-angel kinda way.
I suck at telling an extreme position from sarcasm, do you really find it horrific, or are you being sarcastic?
I get the sense people are angry about the whole situation (the Gaudreau brothers) and looking for places to vent. To me this doesn't seem all that bad. The guy meant it as saying maybe JG can bring some luck in the lottery from heaven.There is no indication that it's sarcasm. People are seriously pissed about this.
There’s being offended..and then there’s thisThere are just so many things wrong with this that it’s hard to believe it’s real.
1. Originally, he either meant that Gaudreau’s death will help the team in the end because they will win the lottery, or that Gaudreau is going to influence the lottery from beyond the grave so that CBJ will win it. Both are brutal and absurd.
2. Suggesting that a draft pick is consolation for the death of a human being with a family that loves and misses him.
3. Suggesting that a draft pick constitutes “hope and help” for people mourning the passing of a human being.
4. The fact that this prediction is needless, baseless, and meaningless, and probably won’t happen anyway. Involving Gaudreau’s name is wholly unnecessary and in incredibly poor taste, no matter how he could have possibly worded it.
5. No sane person would think publishing something like that is a good idea. He did it to generate clicks/controversy/publicity and planned on retracting it after. It’s sleazy, callous, and exploitative. You’ve got to wonder if it was motivated by a bit of schadenfreude on his part. Psychopath behaviour.
6. This is why people hate the press/media. He literally tried to capitalize/profit off of Johnny Gaudreau’s death - I’m sure there’s quite a bit of extra clicks and ad revenue as a result of this, and there will continue to be, even though he edited it. It’s still moronic even after the edit. Despicable.
I’m sure there will be some comments in response to the above along the lines of “it’s not that deep/it was just a lapse in judgement/it’s not that serious. My preemptive response to that is:
Don’t be so naive.
Sadly we exist in a time where outrage has become some Orwellian moral litmus test.There’s being offended..and then there’s this
Digging extra deep to make up theories in order to be extra offended
It’s extremely poorly worded but he meant nothing malicious..just that the Jackets have a “guardian angel” looking after them now and he’s gonna help them finally win a lotterySadly we exist in a time where outrage has become some Orwellian moral litmus test.
It drives me nuts in that its pretentious and fake. No way someone who has real world issues like work, school, family etc can be genuinely outraged by something so trivial to their daily life.
Sadly we exist in a time where outrage has become some Orwellian moral litmus test.
It drives me nuts in that its pretentious and fake. No way someone who has real world issues like work, school, family etc can be genuinely outraged by something so trivial to their daily life.
It’s not a theory. People do scummy things like this all the time, especially seedy desperate hacks like Seravalli.There’s being offended..and then there’s this
Digging extra deep to make up theories in order to be extra offended
Your virtue signaling (look how tough and cool and unbothered I am) and use of cliches like “Orwellian” is what’s pretentious.Sadly we exist in a time where outrage has become some Orwellian moral litmus test.
It drives me nuts in that it’s pretentious and fake. No way someone who has real world issues like work, school, family etc can be genuinely outraged by something so trivial to their daily life.