Elizabeth Mendoza said:That’s exactly my point right there. They just flip-flop whenever the wind changes direction. They have zero credibility.
The guy would basically be eating his own words if anyone pointed out how much this is going to tank his ad revenue. On top of that, he’s so incredibly arrogant and full of himself that I’m honestly surprised he hasn't been taken down a notch by the public yet.
Babic really strikes me as someone dealing with some pretty deep-seated insecurities, too, and he’s clearly not cut out for the spotlight—I mean, when Hebrang mentioned his hands were shaking, he really shouldn't have even let that slip.
But man, you gotta admit the guy has guts, because you definitely need some serious nerve to be in his position. It would be great if we had some kind of superhero fighting corruption who was young, handsome, tall, well-spoken, and totally honest. But he isn't. And we’re living in such a rough neck of the woods that we don't really get a choice, we just have to take whatever we can get.
Anthony Jackson2 said:Index sits somewhere in the middle—Telegram might win on quality, but Index wins on pure volume and speed, just like someone pointed out recently. Whatever goes down, regardless of the hour, it hits Index first.
As for their investigative reporting, I get the feeling a lot of those "exposés" are actually handed to them by certain circles within the Republican Party to clear out anyone who's become a liability. My guess? Babic probably made a deal with the devil just to dodge those tax evasion charges.
I really feel like all investigative journalism across these different news sites just boils down to leaked tips from rival political factions, though I guess the edge Yahoo has is that they don't just tuck those tips away in a drawer, or well, maybe they do, but they definitely don't sit on them nearly as much as some of the other outlets out there.
Honestly, Telegram is way higher quality than Index if you ask me. It’s just like how Index handles all those massive scandals—they don't hold anything back, they aren't drowning in clickbait garbage either, and they have a super clear left-center ideological lean, if you want to get technical about it 🤣
I’d say Telegram is basically tailored exactly to Brankov’s tastes.
Babić is always such a flip-flopper, one minute he’s acting liberal and leaning left, then suddenly he’s pivoting toward being an autocrat because he’d probably love nothing more than banning conservatives from even having a thought. And he does. That’s just how the whole portal operates. You kind of just have to deal with it because they actually do uncover real scandals, which is really the only redeeming quality of that site. Plus, they’re incredibly fast at tracking what's happening across the World and getting everything translated immediately 🤣
Look, I’m just gonna say it: I absolutely do not buy into conspiracy theories, seriously. If you’re out here betting that someone intentionally manufactured this whole situation, then we’re on totally different pages. I mean, let’s just be real and agree that everything has been blown way out of proportion, but my take is that it’s just a massive chain reaction of random circumstances that caused the scale to blow up, rather than some shadowy "powerful interests" or any of those other wild conspiracy tropes.
The way Google marketing became the lifeblood for news sites has basically birthed this absolute monster of clickbait journalism we've been stuck with for the last decade or so, and honestly, I think that’s a massive reason why everything spiraled into such widespread panic. People's genuine fear regarding the virus got multiplied dozens of times over by these outlets, and well, we all saw how that played out. I'm telling you, there are going to be endless scientific studies on this exact phenomenon, probably enough doctoral theses to fill a library. Mark my words.
I was diving into some documentaries about the Great Depression back in '29 and '31 a few months ago, and it really hit me that if people hadn't gone into that frantic frenzy of rushing to the banks to pull their deposits, the crisis might never have reached the catastrophic levels it actually did. Panic is a wild thing, truly.
Yesterday, the numbers for new infections and deaths in France, Italy, and Spain were actually pretty low, but I swear I didn't see a single news headline on any of the major sites making a big deal out of it.
edit, here are the latest figures from today (new cases/deaths):
Spain +2,793 +331 Italy +1,739 +333 France and Germany +3,742 +437 Germany +443 +45 United Kingdom +4,309 +360
It's weirdly quiet, even though the numbers have dropped off significantly.
Btw, I really hope this happens, and honestly, I’m pretty much certain that once that budget transparency app actually goes live, we're going to see a whole wave of independent candidates jumping into the local elections next year, and if that kind of momentum starts building, it’s just going to naturally spill over into the national level too.
dustyridge3 said:If we want to take a trip through history, the only player outside of the Big Three to win a Grand Slam before the age of 26 in the last 17 years is Juan Martín del Potro. In the last ten years, we've seen only three winners outside of that elite trio:
Stan Wawrinka - 3 Grand Slams between ages 30 and 32
Andy Murray - 3 Grand Slams between ages 26 and 30
Marin Čilić - the only Grand Slam title coming right at the end of his 26th year.
We could dig even deeper into history, but what's the point? It wouldn't be the same sport anymore. Across most other sports, athlete longevity has increased and prime years are arriving much later; tennis isn't the only thing being affected by this shift.
This whole argument about the Australian Open is nonsense to me. If we applied that exact same logic, Roger Federer would have won nearly half of his titles at Wimbledon, on a surface used for three tournaments a year where the conditions change from court to court and day to day. 🤷
Don't get mad at me, but I honestly don't see what you're trying to prove with those stats, it's kind of ridiculous 🤣
But hey, I also see you're claiming the Australian Open and Wimbledon are on the same level. 👍
That whole trend actually kicked off with NBA players back in the day, maybe twenty or thirty years ago, and now it’s just bleeding into every single sport out there, which honestly isn't surprising at all, it's just what you'd expect to see happening. And during that same stretch of time, life expectancy jumped up by like ten years, too.
Look, man, I’m telling you right now, Cristiano Ronaldo is hands down the greatest to ever step onto the pitch, so don't even try to come at me with that other stuff
dustyridge3 said:I have to disagree with that assessment; most of them actually reach true maturity anywhere from their early 30s through the end of their careers. Take Roger Federer, for instance—he secured five Grand Slam titles between the ages of 22 and 26, yet he also managed five more from age 31 to 33. I would argue quite confidently that his play looked significantly more dominant and composed after he turned 30 than it ever did during his twenties.
For me, the biggest challenge in evaluating Novak Djokovic is his uncanny ability to systematically dismantle highly reputable opponents even on his worst days; because he doesn't rely solely on service percentages or hitting winners and forced errors, but instead maintains this constant, controlled style where he can simply dial the intensity up or down based on his opponent's rhythm and mood.
I will never regret missing out on seeing Ronaldo in his absolute prime. I hear so much about his dominance and how effortlessly he scored that it’s almost demoralizing to have to settle for grainy highlight reels. It makes it nearly impossible for me to rank him accurately on any all-time list. It is a different matter entirely with Pelé and Maradona, whom I never saw live, as they are much easier to glorify from a distance. When you only start watching someone in the twilight of their career, is it even possible to truly grasp just how transcendent they once were? You see the same phenomenon with Favre in the NFL, or even Peyton Manning.
Novak Djokovic and who else? Look, you don't even realize that tennis has historically been seen as one of those sports with incredibly short careers where the younger guys usually run the show.
Sure, players in their 30s have won tournaments, but people usually just stood around admiring them, marveling at how they could still pull off a win in their later years.
You really need to brush up on your history here and not just base your whole take on what's been trending over the last decade. Now I see why you think Novak Djokovic is the GOAT.
And let's not forget that Novak Djokovic won half of his Grand Slams in Australia, which is impressive and all, but come on...
With 12 French Open titles under his belt, Rafael Nadal is still ahead of Novak Djokovic, and Roger Federer is catching up fast.
Jessica Gonzalez said:Wait, so you're saying an athlete who’s literally redefining the limits of the sport at 38 was somehow physically declining ten years ago and couldn't hold his own against Roger Federer? That seems like some pretty questionable math to me. Meanwhile, here is Roger Federer at 32, absolutely dominating the competition like he hasn't aged a day. I guess they forgot to tell him his prime ended when he was 26. Maybe he should check his WhatsApp for the update.
You can't even argue with logic like that, you've basically won the debate 🙏🙏
Jesse Sullivan5 said:I was just chatting with this fellow—quite an old soul, really—who has sat courtside to watch everything from Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic to Rafael Nadal, Björn Borg, and Laver. He leaned in and told me, with absolute certainty, that Federer is the greatest of them all!
But honestly, the man clearly never saw a single match of Pistol Pete. ☕
They finally caught up to him, honestly, and look, every single tennis player hits a wall eventually, even Novak had his slump recently, and Federer went through it too, except in Fed's case he was already getting up there in age right when he was supposed to be making a comeback, which is exactly what I'm getting at here. I shouldn't have to spell it out for you guys.
ruggedjackal46 said:Ronaldo probably owes a massive thank you note to Messi just for being the reason he ended up as the second-best player on the planet. I mean, let’s be real—if Messi hadn't been around to set the bar that high, Ronaldo would've cruised into that top spot without breaking a sweat. ☕
Meanwhile, Messi can just point to his growth hormone treatments and call it a day 🙂