smokeppb

Oh Marchand... the league literally had to tell him to stop licking and kissing players in the middle of fights.

"I thought he wanted to cuddle. I just wanted to get close to him," Marchand said after the Komarov incident. "He keeps trying to get close to me. I don't know if he's got a thing for me or what. He's cute."

Marketings a shit word for it, I agree. There's alternatives like "propaganda" but that also sounds nefarious.

The hills thing is referring to the land Israel stole in that same conflict as the 1967 one: whatever population was polled went from 71% agree with the Palestinian position to 78% agree with The Entity position, because they changed the wording. They understood the underlying motivations of the population: peace at any cost, reasonable sounding compromises.

It's important to not get stuck softening the language though, ie "tone policing". People have a right to be mad and frankly should use slogans that piss people off. Zios should feel uncomfortable. Palestinian Genocide is great to keep saying because it tells the truth on the ground and keeps Zios not in Israel on the defensive genocide denial stance that never looks good. No need to wait around for amnesty international or the UN or whatever because when Zios come to defend, it leaves an opening to introduce whatever horrors you normally couldn't bring up in conversation.

Probably the Left's biggest weakness is it's lack of willingness to market it's ideas to its audience. "Dictatorship of the Proletariat" comes to mind.

This is a particularly telling demonstration of the power of marketing. A complete dominance shift depending on how the 1967 border question is posed. People are predisposed to being on the side of whatever sounds like peace in the region, "Israel being able to keep the hills around its own airport" sounds like peace to the average person.

Not even Hasbara can educate everyone, it's actually getting worse at it. Why does the Left think it can educate everyone?