The Spinoff Confuses Me

Over the past few years, I have occasionally
gone over to the website, "The Spinoff"
and nearly every time the website has left
me in a state of confusion, when normally
I am in a state of denial.

The website seems to read like it's coming
from the old "Social Credit" party manifesto,
but that isn't what confuses me, I guess the
easiest way to explain is to give examples.

Take the Horrific Christchurch shooting, my
old home town  acted with grace and dignity
and an outpouring of love and support for the
victims and their community, as they should.

Writers from the spinoff, wrote the same,
beautiful pieces of how we should come
together and support each other.

But the same writers, had totally different
opinions of other Terror attacks around the
world, they had previously written on their
own blogs and social media, that no sympathy
should be given because of  a country's  foreign
policy and that it was somehow racist to give
thoughts to that country and not another.

One writer also had no problem in the past with
supporting destorying a memorial to victims because
it gets people talking about the issues.

But it's not just the big issues about Terrorism, that
the writers seem to contradict  themselves.

One writer seem to have a go at an American Family
who took a funny Prom picture, of the Daughter,  Dad
and boyfriend, with the Dad  wagging his finger at the
boy, also showing the boy that he had a sidearm.

Well the writer went off at the dad, calling it  horrible
and basically suggesting  the Dad needs to be #MeToo
Yet this writer has based their whole career of telling
people that they shouldn't criticized parents.

Then there were pieces and pieces written about the
"TPP" and how it was going to destroy this country,
and how our country was stolen from us, yet with a
change of Government, the "TPP" is now a wonderful
idea that is going to create countless of jobs for the
regions.

There's been articles and articles about how the
National Cycle way is a waste of money, yet
nothing about the good for the environment
it will do.  They talk of previous Governments
wasting money, but don't seem to have a problem
with 100 thousand houses being built but not
enough people to go into the houses.

They support a coalition  Government, when in the
past they had written about the anti Asian statements
of one of it's partners.

They talk of the disgraceful behavior of one of the
world's super powers, but give Russia a free ride.

Their writers talk of TV shows/Movies/Music that
contain, they say, misogynists homophobic
and sexist BS, but their favorite shows are the worst
offenders.

They have talked of the disgusting practice of doxxing
on social media, yet their writers have done the very
same thing.

They have talked about not telling people to calm
down and letting people show their emotions, yet
have done the same thing.

They have even talked of Plagiarism and not giving
credit to due authors, but again their writers have done
the same thing.

I guess in a nutshell, what I'm really confused about is
how can a site judge the same behavior differently?

With the Spinoff it all depends on who is doing the
behavior.