Fingerprinting.
Bingo! Google wants to go cookieless and fingerprinting has been one of the solves I’ve always read about in the SEO world.
Fingerprinting.
Bingo! Google wants to go cookieless and fingerprinting has been one of the solves I’ve always read about in the SEO world.
Limit the question(s) and/or only one specific channel that is publicly accessible to all citizens OTA would be a start - PBS maybe. Allow for repeat viewings throughout the week so everyone has a chance to catch it. The major news networks will pick up what they want anyway for sound bytes regardless of multiple or a singular interview.
Repeat at intervals as needed with different questions from a left, right, and moderate perspective. Have an independent panel choose the questions for the interviewer to ask from a pool of questions that are known to be big/hot topics the public cares about.
There’s no need for a circuit. Let the president give their answers officially there and run the country/campaign where they need to.
I know how interviews work. I’ve been on many for jobs and they’re never the same scripted questions. Sure, some sameish ones pop up but I’m also never giving them in advance or been given them in advance.
A presidential media interview IS a fucking job interview. A very public one and @Sunforged@lemmy.ml and @some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org aren’t wrong. The mold should broken at some point. Continuing the tradition just because “that’s how they’ve traditionally worked” is a bullshit excuse. I want to know how they can handle a question about their potential job on the fly because they sure as hell have to respond to it on the fly when shit actually happens.
I’m pretty sure they were making a snide comment regarding sexual stuff. Not literally the job.
Wheezin’ the ju-uice!
Take a shot anytime someone says “by the way”. No one will have to vote because we’ll all be dead
Oh. Now you know how they feel about being persecuted, ya cunt!
Nothing ever goes over your head, does it Drax?
Ah, but then there’s common-law marriages that they will institute.
But your argument, from what I read, is that they fawned over him because he made money. You’re specifically calling out the business/monetary side:
No, they fawned over him because they liked his character and persona in public.