Azealia Banks performs in London

[theleveebroke]

Comments

[gimmemoarjosh]

Why was this accepted?

We don't need to help with her trying to resurrect her "career."

She is literally, racist, homophobic, transphobic, Islamophobic, and so much more!

She is also a chicken murderer for... *ahem* some bullshit that isn't even real.

I could go on forever.

[theleveebroke]

Her performance has been making the rounds on TikTok and social media. I don't like her at all personally, but disliking her ≠ pretending she doesn't exist in the pop culture sphere. The Guardian had a better write-up imo but it's a banned source.

[bethmai]

Why is the Guardian a banned source?!

[theleveebroke]

I'm not sure, but my original post was declined because I used their article. I think a lot of banned sources are banned because they reached out to LJ/ONTD and asked not to be posted here. That used to be a waaay bigger deal back in the day

[pciam]

Probably because they don't want their content posted here. They'd rather people go to the source rather than engage with LJ, I guess lol. We know ONTD doesn't read, so most 'sources' linked here don't actually get clicked on lmao

[bethmai]

yeah, minutes after commenting the question I realised I had never clicked on a source link on ONTD, so why did I care lmao

[pciam]

Love the Faith icon!

[anterrabre]

It's because instead of summing up an article and supplying links people used to copy the entire thing here and not source. That pissed off a lot of outlets and so they requested we not post their articles (although it doesn't stop places like Buzzfeed from stealing and reposting original content from here). Tweets are fair game because a tweet is made with the intention of sharing.

[totteringg]

The workaround is usually to just post a Twitter link to the article and summarize the main points.

[gimmemoarjosh]

I have nothing against you at all, but that doesn't make sense.

Why post a positive write up? You dislike her? Hmm... this post doesn't make that clear, at all.

She is not relevant. And no, your TikTok algorithm doesn't prove that, sorry.

This is literally the most positive post about her on here, that I have seen in OVER A DECADE.

[slaughtermatic]

sis were not a political platform, if it happened and its news it should be accepted. unless its super annoying then we riot, optionally.

[gimmemoarjosh]

All I am saying is, I'd be fine with the post if it wasn't absolutely fucking positive towards her.

It is the only positive leaning post we have had here about her in over a decade.

That is my problem. It feels like promo.

[emmanium]

Remember when ppl went "we shouldn't judge other cultures!!" about her killing chickens in the closet

[theleveebroke]

Genuinely wild, and for anyone who doesn't believe it, here are articles with (graphic) pics and details: the Daily Mail and Page Six

[hennimore]

I don’t get it. Is killing chickens wrong?
Edit: to clarify, I am not a vegetarian, obviously lol.

[theleveebroke]

Not inherently, but Azealia's case is a little....unique. if you have a strong stomach I definitely recommend clicking the Daily Mail link I posted in the comment above and watching the video, but obvious tw for 3 years worth of caked-up blood and feathers