zlacker

You'd never guess that this was a Tupac quote by the media coverage and wave after wave of forced outrage. The whole thing is so embarassing.

>>gfodor+(OP)
“Die slow motherfuckers”

Tupac wasn’t kidding or putting on a show. He was killed by the people he refers to there not long after. Tupac meant those words literally.

>>gfodor+(OP)
Thank goodness it wasn't a quote from the song W.A.P.:-)!

>>gfodor+(OP)
I don't see how it makes it any better that it was a quote. The quote still had words in it. Does Garry Tan think the entire world listens to Tupac? And what wisdom does Tupac really have to offer in this case?

>>gfodor+(OP)
He was literally murdered though

>>gfodor+(OP)
It's also strange because I've seen Tupac Shakur glamorized in popular culture (for example, hagiographic discussions about him on NPR). But Shakur was rapping about killing people, while those people were being targeted and killed by associates of his, and he himself shot people. A 6 year old was even shot in the head and killed with his gun in one of the fights he got into (he claimed he dropped the gun and someone else fired it during the fight).

It's bizarre to see the level of outrage against Tan quoting Tupac compared the the veneration you usually find of Tupac.

>>davesq+x1
> Does Garry Tan think the entire world listens to Tupac?

Ever met a Tupac fan? They do seem to think this, yes.

>>gfodor+(OP)
If Tan's enemies had quoted Tupac's death-wish songs with his name in it, would Tan not have pointed to it as evidence of their vitriol and toxicity?

>>gfodor+(OP)
Does it really matter? It's terrible judgement to post something whose intended meaning hinges on whether you know an American rap song from ~30 years ago to a public venue like Twitter. There are plenty of voters who weren't even born when Tupac was still alive.

>>gfodor+(OP)
Oh. In that case it's no biggie.

>>gfodor+(OP)
How are you able to determine whether outrage was “forced” or genuine?

>>gfodor+(OP)
It's a Tupac quote when you're quoting Tupac.

That's not how people quote things though. That's how you get drunk and let the world know how you really feel about some people lol.

>>arduan+li
Well of course it's no Biggie. They just said it was Tupac.

>>fzeror+RA
You got my joke! Yay! :)

>>davesq+x1
I mean, if someone says something like that and they’re conjuring it up directly or they’re quoting a piece of art, I think that’s obviously relevant to interpreting it. Without taking a position on how severe to interpret it, it’s plainly obvious this important detail is glossed over and ignored and the media coverage of this is desperately trying to leave readers walking away thinking this was a more direct straightforward statement not subject to interpretation of how much to take it at face value.

>>Alexan+di
Sure it matters. It doesn’t mean you ultimately would judge it appropriate, but take any scenario where violent rap lyrics are used and revoke a person’s ability to know they are quoting a song and it will be interpreted wildly differently.

>>archag+Lp
Because I follow these people on Twitter and have seen their histrionics and hypocrisy on the regular.

>>bnralt+w2
> It's bizarre to see the level of outrage against Tan quoting Tupac compared the the veneration you usually find of Tupac.

No one cares when the village idiot threatens to blow up China but when the President does it suddenly it's a problem? /s

>>publiu+Ng
Certainly but the point is that anyone commenting on it in a way that deceptively avoids mentioning this fact is pretty clearly bad faith.

>>gfodor+Ik3
It's only technically better that it was a quote. That doesn't come close to excusing the behavior. It's still completely beyond that pale that he chose those specific lyrics to post on Twitter. The question of how honest the reporting was feels secondary.