• Buffalox@lemmy.worldBanned
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    122
    ·
    2 years ago

    I think it’s a bit unfair they call it just “paint” when it was merely cornstarch that would wash off by itself.
    There’s a huge difference in the degree of vandalism if it’s something that wash off by itself.

    • spaduf@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      This is by design and most people fell for it entirely. Even the second highest content in this thread is carrying water for big oil.

    • Juniper (she/her) 🫐@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 years ago

      It’s possible. And I think it’s likely. That the activists wanted this exact news cycle, where they falsely report that there is damage, gaining widespread coverage, and drawing attention their way, only for people to later learn that it was temporary and grow to respect the act.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zipBanned
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 years ago

        Possibly. I’d imagine the vast majority of people don’t see the followup that there wasn’t damage, here, or the Mona Lisa, or the other events. The goal was outrage coverage for sure, and without causing damage so anyone who actually cares is fine with it. The media will just call it paint, and now that the potential for damage is clear they’ll stop talking about it.