- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
If one looks at the high-branded fashion magazines, the advertising brands use involved large full page imagery with a minimal amount of information and I believe this concept of mainly image based promotion can be applied to Social Media. I sincerely doubt that vast majority of people actually look into or research the brands they see people following, but instead glance over the few images provided and form an opinion based on those.
Thus I believe that attractive image content is enough for people for follow fashion brands in social media.
I would question whether many people follow fashion brands through social media at all, there has been a rise in evidence on how companies pay social media companies to promote their brand for them and that companies can additionally buy 'followers".
However, if somebody is seen to be following a brand through social media, and particularly a fashion brand, it's appearance on that the social media site will be of sole importance. The people who follow these brands not only want to show they like the brand but also appear to know a lot of fashion to the people who follow them, thus if the imagery of the brand is awful it not only makes the brand look bad but also the people who follow the brand.
(As a side note: I'm aware of the weakness in my argument, however I thought I'd try get this debate going, I can only commend the debate creator for the excellent introduction that they have provided.)
" Frankly, the IRA is a terrorist group right? To be eligible for being called "a terrorist group", I don't know what they've done but it's gotta be pretty fucking bad."
They blew up a hotel attempting to kill the Prime Minister (then Margaret Thatcher), they also killed MPs using bombs and made a lot of violent attacks on people.
Er... I had school?
Though on a serious note, I have been concentrating on my studies for a while, took a break from the internet as a whole, but to be honest I did look in on Createdebate now and then, I just never had the time to construct argument worth reading.
I often take these breaks from CD for a bit, this one was just longer than most, it all comes from me taking on too many debates at once, with arguments getting longer and longer with every dispute until I end up spending 3 hours writing in debates. However it is now the holidays over here in GB and I thought I'd spend some time catching up.
It was nice to see that I was missed :)
As a prime example on how additional political media benefits the democratic process, the BBC's Question Time features a panel of 5 guests which will often be from a range of political viewpoints of whom are encouraged to debate and discuss political issues on a weekly basis.
The debating style and manner often mirrors that of the House of Commons when Prime Ministers Questions are in session, with lots of shouts of raw opinion and partisan tribalism, however unlike the Parliamentary debates, guests on Question Time will often be forced to discuss issues that a member of the audiences raises through a question. This results in politicians commenting on issues at the same moment, providing the audiences and viewers with a clear comparison of how party opinions differ.
Ultimately, additional political media encourages viewers to think about political issues and provides them with deep analysis and differing viewpoints on those issues, thus encouraging them to get more involved in politics and aiding the democratic process.
And if you look at the past British colonies, the one's which we continued along our economic policy have become some of the most powerful countries in the world. The only exceptions are those countries in Africa which received dictators almost immediately after the British left, of whom then literally undid all the economic infrastructure that the British had spent so many decades cultivating.
"It should! If it doesn't then you're an idiot. Read your question, then read my answer. If you're still lost, then that's your problem... not mine."
Here's my response: "Fuck you sideways".
And before you complain that it doesn't make any sense here's my response after your next argument:
"It should! If it doesn't then you're an idiot. Read your question, then read my answer. If you're still lost, then that's your problem... not mine."
Now I've saved us both some time.
"And the World Wide Web would be useless without the internet. Did you skip over the part where I said that we rely on each other's inventions?"
Maybe you should address the whole argument before you start to reference the later parts of it.
"If you get all of your facts from Wikipedia, then you really are ignorant."
Well down my road there is a museum, in this museum is an exhibit specifically about John Logie Baird and the invention of the television. Now I've seen the exhibit and I know what it states to be true but copy and pasting a museum is pretty difficult and so I'll have to source from Wikipedia. Unless of course, you can find a more reliable source that covers nearly all knowledge.
"You do know how Wikipedia works, right?"
What? The concept that anyone can create a page, change or edit it? Could you please explain how that differs from the rest of the internet?
"Yes, his work was the first step... so he does deserve credit, but it isn't what you think. http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/
As I said before, in the museum they have a model of his first project.
"That's Baird's TV. A few years later, Philo Farnsworth (American) improved it.
Which one looks more like the modern television?"
That's a stupid argument, shall we take pictures of a calculator 50 years ago and take a picture of one made by Casio 5 years ago? Which one looks more like the modern calculator? Best we better accredit the Japanese for yet another invention.
"I assume that those American shows that are remakes of British shows are aired in Britain too. If I go online and look at the Box Office Index for the UK, the top movies are all American. Our entertainment is one of our greatest exports and it's huge over there. Am I wrong?"
Yes, you're right the popular trash for the masses over here in the UK is primarily American. I cannot disagree.
"Sure, except the Web depends on the Internet in order to work, where as a car doesn't need a road."
The Car needs something solid beneath it to work, it cannot drive across water. Likewise the World Wide Web was merely a model that needed a worldwide network to function. The internet sufficed.
"I really shouldn't have to. It should have been obvious."
Only in your little world.
"You come off so naïve, that it's hard not to."
Well I'm the one sitting here trying to decipher whether you're being sarcastic or actually are genuinely stupid and it's starting to become very difficult.
"You're starting to sound desperate. I must be winning this debate."
You do love dodging questions even when you ask them yourself.
I suppose I'll answer it for you, Alexander Graham Bell moved to North America because his father was in Newfoundland and was dying, that's the sole reason he left Great Britain. Thus, you haven't successfully refuted my point that Alexander Graham Bell was a British inventor.
"To show the role that American products play in your everyday life."
What language is it you speak again?
"Oh, so it went from clay bowl to electric kettle? That was a major improvement then!"
Yes, I suppose it was.
I find it humorous that you source a British tragedy. Let me link you some other news stories.
You've had 20 alone within Obama's administration.
"What makes you think that I didn't look at the list?"
Maybe you did look at the list but the fact is that you avoided addressing it.
"Oh, come on! Are you a kid? You insult like one and comprehend information like one too. Go back and reread if you don't understand. This is another example of something that should be very obvious."
Oh dear, this is Nummi all over again. Someone you can't properly write arguments and refuses to explain the mess it is they call literacy.
"That's funny, I've been getting the same vibe from you (except with Britain, not America, of course). You seem to have your head so far up your ass, I'd be surprised if you've ever left your bedroom."
I have been to; France, Spain, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Italy, Finland, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Holland, China and Hong Kong.
I have indeed left my bedroom.
" I don't know if you noticed, but my user pic is of a Brit. "
My user picture is a penguin, am I an Antarctican? Am I suddenly aware of the plight of penguins?
"My favorite films, are British films. I would almost rather live in Europe, than the US..."
Sorry, next time I debate with someone I'll make sure I stalk them first. Just so I make sure not to make incorrect claims on their interests or hobbies.
"...but that's because I'm a history nut and you guys have a much more colorful history than us. "
I also like my fair share of history and I also watch a fair amount of American films. Which is why I get annoyed at films like "The Patriot" and "U-571" which actively distort history (at my country's expense) to fuel the fetish that is American nationalism.
"I have pride in my country though. It's where I grew up. It makes me sick to read the garbage coming from some of the British users, who act like they know how America really is. You don't live here, I do."
We're not the ones starting these debates. If I remember correctly this was just a nice debate about the Royal family and then you joined in.
"You say we're full of nationalist propaganda... and now I'm starting to think that British children are getting a faulty anti-American education."
If anything we get a pro-American education. The only thing that makes us Anti-american is when we see Americans saying 'Our country was fought against an empire or tyranny and created a nation of freedom, equality (etc).' a statement which itself is an insult to history. I get annoyed when everytime I see an American politician talking about how their nation apparently is the only one which stands for equality of opportunity or economic individualism, or when I find out that the USA is arrogant enough to spy on their neighbours, or when American companies who own businesses in my nation come to my government and say 'Sorry we're not paying any taxes here, but you see we only pay taxes to the US government'.
But then to top it off, we had the BP oil spill. An accident. Which resulted in huge Anti-British protests in the US where Americans set fire to the Union Jack. Or when our own Prime Minister, after meeting with President Obama, goes on television and states that 'Britain must admit that they were a junior partner in the Second World War'.
"It seems like the nationalism is much stronger in Britain, than in America."
And you base this of two guys on a website? Trust me, nationalism is next to non-existent in the UK, the stupid racist groups like the EDL and BNP ruined it for us.
"Yeah, our government consists of a bunch of assholes... but yours is just as corrupt. You're blind if you don't see that."
Our government isn't constantly in the pay of whichever company has enough money to do so. I look at my country and I look at yours. Mine has a decent minimum wage, law enforced working conditions, free healthcare (etc). You remember all that food you claim the US export to Britain? We only see a minority of your 'edible' products because the rest of it is deemed by my government to be "unfit for human consumption". We have a chain of supermarkets here called Asda, it's owned by Walmart, but can't be called Walmart because they are run in completely different ways, solely because we have health and safety laws protecting employees here in the UK.
So when I hear that the US still encourages its children to stand up and pledge allegiance to their 'great' country. Could you please explain what on Earth it is they're pledging allegiance to?
"Canada still swears allegiance to the Queen, if you haven't noticed."
Well, maybe I should have said Australia.
"Hmmm... so you have a history where you guys are the good guys and we have a history where we're the good guys... and that's surprising to you? Ever think that maybe it's your information that's fucked up?"
Well, you've yet to provide evidence for your claim that the U.S 'kicked our arses' and now you want me to provide evidence on my statement?
"Oh, so you must remember the Revolutionary War. Did you serve in it?"
Why would I have to had served in the Revolutionary War to read a history book?
"Maybe you're older than I thought... but the history that I and the rest of the World knows, is that you lost the Revolutionary War."
You lost Vietnam, the whole world knows you lost the Vietnam War. Would you agree that the Vietnamese kicked your arses?
"We were the Allied Forces. You should really start viewing us as one team during that period, because that's how it was."
I like how the allied forces were represented in the film "Saving Private Ryan". I counted a grand total of 0 non-American allied troops. It especially stung when you replaced all the British amphibious landing craft with American transport on the D-Day opening scene, but then again you wouldn't want to hurt that precious American nationalism.
"The United States was the largest supplier of material."
Congratulations on not fighting!
"In return, you guys helped train a lot of our troops. Your role was crucial to the victory of WW2, but we do deserve credit."
Not the amount you claim to.
"Some say, ours and Russia's roles in the War is what made us world superpowers."
Yours and Russia lack of role in the War is what made you world superpowers. You had plenty of time to build up your industry and economy while the largest Empire in the world was fighting one of the greatest wars known to man, alone.
What certainly made your nation a superpower is all that material 'supplied' us was actually a loan, my nation only finished paying it back a few years ago.
And then we get bombarded with "kicked your arses in the Revolutionary War" instead of 'thanks for helping us become a major world power'.
"Am I wrong? You're British, you tell me."
I already disputed it, I'm not going to claim that there a no American businesses here at all, but they certainly do not have the influence you claimed they did at the start.
And anyway, any American influence here is probably matched over there, but I'm sure you'll see in the list of countries I've visited the U.S wasn't one of them.
"Yeah... and that's one reason why I really like your country, so stop ruining it! lol"
Well, your country already does like to tarnish history with prime examples being the films I listed earlier.
"Okay, fair enough. What happened was I saw that you mentioned the English language again and remembered a point I wanted to make earlier. The comment itself, shouldn't have been confusing though."
Well I'll address your new point then, How can you claim that the English Language was not invented by the English?
"I think it had more to do with the amount of countries from across the globe, rather than the countries themselves."
Well in that case, it was already a World War before the US joined, we already had Canada making up for North America.
"Yeah, as Germany was conquering France. We were getting prepared."
But I thought you said that the World Wars were a European conflict and your nation did not want to get involved.
"Again, we didn't turn up late. We were attacked. We arrived to our war on time... not until we arrived in Europe, did we become the Allied Forces. We were supplying Britain with material before then."
Well the fact that your President hated our Empire and actively abused the situation in World War II to try to destroy it.
(Since you dislike my sourcing of Wikipedia, here are two other links, I believe they are American websites)
Allright, suppose I give up eating meat by my son who ran away from me is still eating meat. I start to go around fighting against the eating of meat. Decades later this still eats meat while the rest of the population have given it up.
Is it not immoral then?
We provided our British colonists with slaves who then revolted and turned themselves into their own nation (apparently with a new creed of equality) and it was the United States who then continued slavery long after many other countries abolished it.
Back to the analogy, the point you're arguing is like the future vegetarians calling us immoral because we gave our children meat to eat.
I suppose that teaches me to continue my "facts" beyond their truth. My statement was an assumption and an assumption I cannot prove. However I can come close:
The population of the British Empire in 1900 was 419,920,000, whereas the estimated world population was 1,700,000,000.
419,920,000/1,700,000,000=0.247... (Around 25% to 1dp)
I suppose we both fell short a bit this time around ;)
Well, after the American revolution we continued to conquer and colonise until we owned a quarter of the globe and governing a higher percentage of its population. This statement alone disproves your original point that the American revolution led to the British empire unravelling.
Every point that Guitarguy makes could easily be applied in the other direction. I could copy out his statement and use it to support my own side.
While I will not disagree to the point that America has an influence on Britain, that influence is nullified by the influence Britain has on America. Thus, it is stupid for Guitarguy to claim that Britain should thank America for "food" (etc).
"You are full of shit when you say that you didn't call him an obvious troll."
Well if he isn't a troll he must be stupid.
You have my apologies for not addressing you other points, though they were very well made and probably correct. However I do not have much time and wanted to dispute this outrageous claim before I left.
"You guys didn't really stop slavery until we did."
We were freeing slaves before your country existed, I fail to see how you can claim we didn't stop slavery until after you did.
"We do, currently."
You do what? You have this bad habit of debating in some fantasy context where everything you write down makes sense.
"Vint Cerf and Bob Kahn are credited as the inventors of the Internet. They're both American."
But their internet would be useless without the World Wide Web, its like the inventor of the road claiming credit for inventing the car.
"The first fully functional television was invented by Philo Farnsworth, also an American."
"John Logie Baird FRSE (14 August 1888 – 14 June 1946) was a Scottish scientist, engineer, innovator and inventor of the world's first television; Wikipedia.
"Half of the British shows, that were remade for America didn't even last past a few episodes. Most of the ones that did are actually starring the Brits from the original show (ex. Hell's Kitchen, Kitchen Nightmares, The Office (although it didn't star Ricky Gervais, it was produced by him) The Weakest Link, all of those shows produced by Simon Cowell, etc.). It seems to me like Brits are actually the one's behind most of the Americanized British shows."
You list a few cheap shows which are virtual pig feed on this side of the pond. What you've claimed is impossible to prove or disprove which is why I didn't hesitate to make an equally outrageous claim. We can sit here and list TV shows for all eternity or you can come up with some arguments that you can actually support with more evidence that your "experience".
"Then we obviously rely on each other's inventions, don't we?"
Like the car relying on the road.
"You sure do jump to the worst of conclusions when you read stuff, don't you? I said "our" as in you and me, Britain and America."
Then clearly someone needs to be more clear when using their pronouns.
"I don't know, man... I've been having to point out a lot of your misinterpretations..."
Well you're the one who writes in sarcasm.
"What do you use more? The practical household light bulb or the impractical lamp? I would imagine that it's the household bulb invented by Thomas Edison."
What do you use more the internet or the world wide web? I would imagine it was the world wide web invented by Sir Tim Berners-Lee.
"Maybe, but he was still an American citizen. You have to wonder why he moved to America to unveil his invention and didn't just stay in Britain."
Maybe you could do your pondering elsewhere and I'll wait until you write an argument.
Here's a hint, to find out answers to questions it helps if you use Google.
"Well, fuck. You probably use a different American brand, right?"
I fail to see why my toothpaste is relevant to this debate.
"Not the first kettle though. If you want to take credit for improvements, then you have to give America credit for most of the inventions that you listed."
No, you are correct. The British clearly did not invent boiling water, so the invention of the electric kettle is a minor improvement compared to that caveman with a clay bowl over a fire.
"Guns, not knives lol. You guys are the ones that shouldn't be left alone with sharp objects... hints, a particular decapitation in a public place."
Sorry, I'm sure there have been a multitude of decapitations throughout our history, could you please narrow down the event from the two millennia time frame you originally placed it in.
"I did. I learned about a lot of French inventions."
So you're not going to look at the list at all, nice way of debating, ignore the evidence that doesn't agree with you.
"Damn! You still think I was talking about the invention of stores? LOL! Commercialization, exports, etc. Not inventions, products really. Stuff that is American and plays a big role in Britain. You pretty much listed inventions for no reason..."
Can you please write as if you had an education, I've no idea what your point is but apparently there is some magical American thing that "plays a big role in Britain" and it's got something to do with commercialisation.
"Experience would be one."
What experience? Where you there at the American revolution then?
From what I gather your "experience" consists of an individual who spent their lives watching American nationalist films and probably never left the country.
"They'd be dumb too. You actually thought I was taking credit for the invention of food. LOL! Come on, man! I know you aren't that slow!"
It appears to me that we are not debating on whether Britain should keep the Royal Family, though I'm alright with that change in topic. But neither are we debating on whether America is greater than Britain, we are debating on what the ruddy fuck you keep saying because you debate in a manner of ridiculous claims and sarcastic responses, if you continue to fail at speaking plain English then I cannot see this debate continuing.
"America isn't a British nation, is it?"
Neither is Canada, but Canada do not make claims to kicking our arses.
"You lost the Revolutionary, didn't you? I can't wait to hear you repeat the same old "you had help from the French, blah, blah, blah!"."
So you don't like me telling you facts? Are you afraid I'll shatter that closed mind of yours and ruin some fantasy where some small time American colonists unite for the good of the common man against an evil empire which heavily taxes them for no reason whatsover?
And I find it amusing that you claim I'll repeat the "same old" story, Mr "We kick your arses blah blah blah"
You've just admitted that your claims can be disproven and your reply is "so what"? Is that it? Are you going to continue blatantly ignoring the facts and live is some dream world?
"That brings us back to your WW2 complaint. If you're all for fighting it alone, then don't complain about how it took us a while to help you out in WW2."
I'm not complaining that you arrived late, I'm complaining that your nation takes far to much credit for the war in which they had a minimal amount of contribution to winning.
"Sorry, skipped over this one. Exports and businesses. Our products and businesses are pretty big over in your country."
I like all that evidence you don't have.
"Doesn't hide the fact that our music is big over in Britain. British artists are big here too."
Do you get all these points from Sunday magazines or something?
"I didn't dodge anything, you just didn't take the proper meaning out of my comment. I'll rephrase it... "now look at your small country, whose claim to fame is the past!"."
I just like to rub it in that my country has a past.
"Did you not take credit for the English language and get on me for Americans using "your" language?"
Sorry, I'm completely baffled on trying to work out what it is that you're thinking when you write these responses. I'll just try iron out this little sub-debate.
You asked me which country was more relevant I stated that Britain's actions "led to English being one of the most dominant languages speakable, democratic values being widespread, capitalism being the primary economic system and the very borders of the nations in the continent of Africa."
Your response was: "You do realize that you didn't invent the English language, right? It formed over time out of a combination of other languages."
Of which I then failed to see the dispute (or the relevance) to my original point, you randomly claim that the English did not invent the English language and completely ignore my dispute to your claim that Britain had no relevance in the world.
"It didn't really become a World War until Japan attacked us and we got involved, did it?"
Well in that case it wasn't a World War at all because Switzerland didn't get involved.
"We jumped on your side because the enemy (your enemy) declared war on us."
The USA were conscripting men for the war long before Japan declared war on them.
"It's a good thing we have allies, huh?"
Not when they turn up late for the biggest conflicts in history.
"Umm what? So you've never heard of the English Civil war? The monarchy of England had fucked up the country in many ways, and there is at least one example to disillusion any romanticized view of the monarchy."
Pardon me, I meant to address the English civil war. While it was one of the bloodiest conflicts England has ever been in, it can be hardly called a revolution. Yes, the got rid of the King, but they replaced him with a Lord Protector with almost identical powers and restored the monarchy a decade or two later.
And please explain how the monarchy of the UK has "fucked up the country" and also how elected head of states do not "fuck up" countries.
"Have you ever read Wealth of Nations?"
Not all of it, just the major parts when I was studying economics.
"Smith explains quite clearly, over and over, that nobility and gov't worked in tandem. And it wasn't just limited to local gov't, either. Workers were punished for protests or strikes, and the few nobles who held a great deal of power easily and quite often worked together in their collective interests to hold the workers down, and (whenever the situation would warrant it) the state would facilitate such effort"
I'll have to agree with you, but those values which were enforced at that time were equally spread across the globe.
And interestingly enough, our country with a constitutional monarchy has clearly moved on from those times, but what you've just described is almost identical to the economic and political situation in your nation with a democratic republic
""I pledge Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all."
Sorry, it seems that my claim was incorrect and that you are indeed correct , my mistake entirely.
"Our president is elected once every 4 years and is only the head of 1 of our 3 branches that keep themselves in check. "
I am well aware of this as I'm studying American politics.
"I've never heard of any american being called "unpatriotic" for dissing the president."
Doesn't mean it is improbable.
"I should be surprised that you said that, but sadly I'm not."
I'm surprised to hear that you apparently know me so well, considering that this is (from what I believe) our first debate against one another.
"They're iconic of a much more brutal history that the masses have largely forgotten or ignored."
Please expand on why the British monarchy has a brutal history.
"The massive genocide toward the Native Americans came before the USA being formed."
"That one is on you guys"
Our only contribution to the genocide was being unfortunate enough to spread diseases like every other nation on the planet.
"And, we got our slaves from you guys."
Then you could have got rid of your slaves when we got rid of ours.
I didn't state that Guitarguy was obviously a troll, I'm just really confused about how a person of reasonable intelligence can make arguments the way he does.
He justifies this debate by claiming that he's fed up of us Britons "talk[ing] shit about America" and yet the whole purpose of creating this debate is to give him an excuse to talk shit about Britain.
And arguing with him in nationalist debates is nearly intolerable due to the lack of evidence to support the outrageous claims he makes, in another debate he said " I hope you[Britain] enjoy our[America's] TV shows, movies, websites... actually, the internet in general, restaurants, food, stores, books, music,". The idea that America gave Britain "food" or "books" is absurd and the only thing he has to back it up is "experience".