Outrage accept when it comes to actual things that kill people, like wars. We are all about getting lied to into wars, accepting hundreds of thousands of deaths, not punishing those who got us into wars, then promoting them and letting them start more wars. Where is the outrage for that?
The “outrage” in this article came from the Washington Post. We are told what is outraging others and what should be outraging us by unreliable sources with a specific agenda to push some narratives and not others.
Good point. Get the masses rowled up over culture wars while ignoring the important stuff.
I didn't find this article or the Washington Post article outrageous and I don't think they were intended to cause outrage. I think it's an interesting story and interesting history, I agree that it was wrong for people to harvest these brains 100 years ago, and I think the museum is generally doing the right thing today. I came to these conclusions without feeling any sense of anger or outrage, and I don't think a story needs to provoke those emotions to be considered newsworthy.
Watching the world burn down around you while you contemplate how, for one brief, glorious moment, you garnered a lot of clicks. That's the life.
This is our ascendant religion, and it’s important to protect it from blasphemy.
Solve the issue? But that's the thing, it's outrage, but it's also unactionable; people generally are powerless to change things.
Clicks = money. It’s not always a grand scheme, only sometimes.