substack.com/@timwilkinson2/note/c-100605895

Preview meta tags from the substack.com website.

Linked Hostnames

1

Thumbnail

Search Engine Appearance

Google

https://substack.com/@timwilkinson2/note/c-100605895

Tim Wilkinson on Substack

Are we basically talking about canards here? Is the analysis something like: 1.anecdata, 2. distorted or confected, 3. feeds a stereotype or simple narrative, 4. entertainingly ridiculous? Can't think of one offhand - David Cameron fucking a pig's head came to mind, but doesn't really work. One problem is identifying some positive effects for them to have had...



Bing

Tim Wilkinson on Substack

https://substack.com/@timwilkinson2/note/c-100605895

Are we basically talking about canards here? Is the analysis something like: 1.anecdata, 2. distorted or confected, 3. feeds a stereotype or simple narrative, 4. entertainingly ridiculous? Can't think of one offhand - David Cameron fucking a pig's head came to mind, but doesn't really work. One problem is identifying some positive effects for them to have had...



DuckDuckGo

https://substack.com/@timwilkinson2/note/c-100605895

Tim Wilkinson on Substack

Are we basically talking about canards here? Is the analysis something like: 1.anecdata, 2. distorted or confected, 3. feeds a stereotype or simple narrative, 4. entertainingly ridiculous? Can't think of one offhand - David Cameron fucking a pig's head came to mind, but doesn't really work. One problem is identifying some positive effects for them to have had...

  • General Meta Tags

    14
    • title
      Tim Wilkinson on Substack: "Are we basically talking about canards here? Is the analysis something like: 1.anecdata, 2. distorted or confected, 3. feeds a stereotype or simple narrative, 4. entertainingly ridiculous? Can't think of one offhand - David Cameron fucking a pig's head came to mind, but doesn't…"
    • title
    • title
    • title
    • title

  • Open Graph Meta Tags

    9
    • og:url
      https://substack.com/@timwilkinson2/note/c-100605895
    • og:type
      article
    • og:title
      Tim Wilkinson on Substack
    • og:description
      Are we basically talking about canards here? Is the analysis something like: 1.anecdata, 2. distorted or confected, 3. feeds a stereotype or simple narrative, 4. entertainingly ridiculous? Can't think of one offhand - David Cameron fucking a pig's head came to mind, but doesn't really work. One problem is identifying some positive effects for them to have had...
    • og:image
      https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/w_680,h_680,c_limit,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack.com%2Fnote%2Fc-100605895%2Fpreview.jpeg%3Fsize%3Dsm

  • Twitter Meta Tags

    8
    • twitter:label1
      Likes
    • twitter:data1
      0
    • twitter:label2
      Replies
    • twitter:data2
      0
    • twitter:title
      Tim Wilkinson on Substack

  • Link Tags

    37
    • apple-touch-icon
      https://substackcdn.com/icons/substack/apple-touch-icon.png
    • canonical
      https://substack.com/@timwilkinson2/note/c-100605895
    • icon
      https://substackcdn.com/icons/substack/icon.svg
    • manifest
      /manifest.json
    • preconnect
      https://substackcdn.com

Links

4