Online conversations around Boeing, its CEO, two dead whistleblowers, and the brand image of Boeing are highly negative and critical. This negativity stems from multiple issues the company has been facing, including alleged manufacturing defects on the 737 MAX, the death of two whistleblowers under mysterious circumstances, and overall concerns about the company's focus on profits over safety.
Public sentiment toward Boeing seems to be dropping significantly, falling from around 50% just over a week ago to 39% today.
Sentiment seems to decline with increased conversation about airline safety and Boeing aircraft.
Suspicious Whistleblower Deaths
Whistleblower Joshua Dean, a former quality auditor at Boeing supplier Spirit AeroSystems, made allegations about willful ignorance of manufacturing defects on the 737 MAX. Several weeks after another whistleblower John Barnett’s suspicious death, Dean was also reported dead, sparking outrage and suspicion.
Many Americans surmise Boeing is involved in both Barnett and Dean’s deaths. Some even accuse the company of behaving like a mob and having their "own hitmen lined up." There is a growing belief in the potential for corporate cover-ups and conspiracy theories.
People frequently discuss whether Boeing has hired professional assassins to eliminate whistleblowers, although these claims appear to be speculative and lack direct evidence.
Increased Fear of Flying
Safety has been the most prevalent issue in discussions about Boeing. Many planes, particularly the 737 Max, have been cited for various safety issues, including two fatal accidents in recent years. Stories of malfunctions leading to crashes, losses, and passenger danger are on the rise.
Ongoing safety issues have led some people to voice concerns about boarding Boeing planes and the company's commitment to safety. Some voters have even suggested the company be nationalized to ensure better safety standards.
The number of Americans who say they feel concerned about the safety of Boeing's planes seems to be increasing. Some say they would not want to fly with Boeing due to their perceived negligence and focus on profits over safety. There are also voices advising others not to work for Boeing.
Many people also call for Boeing to be held accountable for its safety issues. They demand transparency from the company and express the need for regulatory bodies like the FAA to step in and ensure safety standards are upheld.
Critiques of Boeing’s Business Practices
There is also criticism of Boeing's relationship with its employees and suppliers, and general corporate practices. One commenter mentions a cage full of defective parts in a non-union shop in South Carolina, implying the company is cutting corners on quality and safety.
The search for a new Boeing CEO after Dave Calhoun stepped down is also met with sarcasm. Some are saying the right choice should, "Restore faith that the company cares whether your plane falls out of the sky."
Furthermore, there is talk suggesting Boeing's safety issues may be a result of its focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives. Some people believe, along with general negligence in quality control, Boeing is prioritizing identity politics over passenger safety.
There are also conversations about Boeing's financial performance, with Americans discussing its stock price and financial results. Some express concern about the company's future, fearing the implications of air travel becoming increasingly unsafe.
Overall, conversations around Boeing and its brand value are highly critical and negative. Most people express distrust and dissatisfaction with the company's practices and leadership. This seems to be harming Boeing's brand image and customer trust going forward.
A striking event at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has caused a flurry of online reactions. UNC Chapel Hill fraternity brothers stood up, surrounding the American flag and protecting it from vandalism by pro-Palestine protesters on campus. Images and video of the incident have elicited strong reactions American public, many of which include praise and applause.
One of the best photos of 2024 so far:
Fraternity brothers are pelted by anti-Israel protesters at UNC Chapel Hill while protecting the United States flag as it is re-hoisted following its removal by protesters.
Many view the young men's actions as a demonstration of patriotism, upholding the values and principles of the United States, and protecting the country's symbols. These sentiments are often expressed by conservative voters who may feel the protests represent a threat to American values and traditions. However, many Americans who value the flag seem to support the students defending it.
A significant portionof the online discussion expresses a desire to see more young people, particularly strong young men, take an active role in upholding American values. Those who appreciate and champion the frat brothers' actions declare support and even donations.
National sentiment toward protests and universities increased slightly after sensational events like the UNC frat boys defending the flag.
Discussion volume has also increased in the last few days.
Throw a Rager GoFundMe
A GoFundMe started to “throw a rager” in celebration of the frat boys’ actions raised more than $500,000 in the first two days. This suggests American voters feel positively about supporting pro-America causes.
Discussion about the GoFundMe is slightly more divided, despite the significant amount of funds raised. Some feel that fraternity brothers are taking advantage of the generosity of others to fund what they perceive as an unnecessary and indulgent event. They argue GoFundMe should be used to raise money for important causes like medical bills, education, or disaster relief, rather than for a fraternity party.
On the other hand, many see no issue with the campaign, arguing the fraternity brothers have every right to fundraise for their party if people are willing to donate. They say the GoFundMe platform is open to all types of fundraising efforts and it is up to individual donors to decide where their money goes. Supporters of the campaign often view it as a harmless, fun way for the fraternity to celebrate and unwind.
Criticism of Counter-Protesters
Those who criticize the frat boys’ actions view them as an attempt to suppress or invalidate the protests. Often progressives and pro-Palestine sympathizers, this group argues the students’ actions ignore the broader issues Palestine protests aim to address. They prioritize the issues of police brutality and alleged genocide by Israel.
Many speaking out against the counter-protesters argue actions like those of the frat brothers – and even of police – are infringing on the protesters' right to free speech and peaceful assembly. They believe counter-protester actions, and the American support they have received, reflect a broader societal issue of intolerance towards dissenting views.
This group also highlights a perception of police brutality against pro-Palestine protesters. They say law enforcement's response has been excessively violent and unnecessary. They express concern about the potential for these incidents to escalate and result in further harm to students. There’s also a perceived double standard in police response to different pro-Palestine protesters versus pro-Israel and pro-America counter-protesters.
Unexpected Unity Against Joe Biden
A similar campus protest event revealed a surprising emergence of solidarity between two very opposed groups. A unique amalgamation of anti-Israel protesters and Trump supporters at University of Alabama began chanting together in disapproval of President Joe Biden. This unlikely moment of unity has also been garnering attention. The shared sentiment, expressed in “F*** Joe Biden” chants, is a notable point of convergence between two distinctly different groups.
.@UofAlabama — Both left-wing and right-wing demonstrators protesting against and for Israel unite in chants of, “F— Joe Biden.” pic.twitter.com/2DwMyW4X1g
As MIG Reports has previously analyzed, President Biden's approval ratings have been fluctuating and he has received backlash on several key issues. Thus, it is not entirely surprising to see protests of his administration. However, the coupling of anti-Israel protests with Trump supporters' vocal disapproval of Biden has certainly raised eyebrows.
While the two groups share a common dislike for the current administration, their reasons differ greatly. Anti-Israel protesters are often driven by concerns over the Israel-Hamas conflict, whereas Trump supporters primarily voice dissatisfaction with Biden's domestic policies.
Many online made sarcastic comments suggesting Joe Biden had finally delivered on his promise to bring America together.
White Boy Summer and a Resurgence of Patriotism
The term "White Boy Summer" has also gained significant attention, primarily due to its use in a viral internet meme. The phrase was popularized by Chet Hanks, son of actor Tom Hanks, in 2021. The phrase is often used to call for young American men to embrace positivity and respect for all races, along with American values.
Since its rise to popularity, the phrase has been taken up by many conservatives who identify as patriotic. It is often to represent a broader movement of young men aiming to "save" America and has recently been applied to the UNC fraternity brothers and other like students chanting “We want Trump” at University of Mississippi.
— 🇺🇸Travis Media Group🇺🇸 (@TM1Politics) May 2, 2024
Many conservative voters who use the term argue that young patriotic men are the backbone of America and have a crucial role to play in upholding traditional American values. They often emphasize themes such as personal responsibility, individual liberty, constitutional rights, and love of country.
There are references to those who embody White Boy Summer, like the University of North Carolina (UNC) fraternity boys, takingit upon themselves to counter the narrative of America's decline by engaging in various acts of community service and activism.
The reactions to Judge Juan Merchan holding former President Trump in contempt for violating a gag order doesn’t seem to sway voter opinions about the court case or Trump as a 2024 presidential candidate. Those who support Trump and view the trial as politicized continue to do so. And those who believe Trump should be punished for his actions feel Judge Merchan’s actions are justified.
Republicans and conservatives express outrage and skepticism at the contempt ruling. They view special counsel Jack Smith as a political hitman and believe the case is politically motivated. Many also believe Trump is being unjustly persecuted and are calling for investigations into the individuals they perceive to be orchestrating this persecution.
Democrats and anti-Trump Republicans are more likely to believe Trump has violated the gag order and should be held accountable for his actions. These voters are likely to be generally critical of Trump's presidency and his future election prospects. They argue no one is above the law, including former presidents, and Trump should face the consequences of his actions.
Liberals tend to believe Trump represents a threat to democracy and accuse him of aspiring to dictatorship. This group often cites various investigations and legal actions against Trump as evidence of his supposed criminal behavior.
The fact that Trump is being prosecuted for multiple crimesindicates to anti-Trump voters that he is guilty. Meanwhile, the same evidence is viewed by Trump supporters, not as a sign that Trump is guilty, but rather that the cases are politically motivated.
Some moderate voters hold skepticism towards both sides, questioning the motivations and actions of all involved. These individuals express frustration at the perceived political theater and call for more focus on issues that directly affect the American people.
There are also Democrats who express concern about the potential impact of protests and contempt charges on the upcoming election. They worry court rulings or convictions could lead to a backlash among certain voter groups, ultimately helping Trump in his re-election bid.
Donald Trump being held in contempt by Judge Merchan has not significantly impacted his approval, dropping only one point nationally and in swing states.
Sentiment towards Trump’s legal issues also dropped slightly, indicating some voters may feel unhappy with the proceedings.
Fear of Trump Being Re-elected
Democrats and anti-Trump Republicans are more likely to view the contempt charge as a clear sign of Trump's disregard for the law and the Constitution. Some liberals argue the former president is attempting to establish a dictatorship, undermine democracy, and escape accountability for alleged criminal activities. They express fear that if Trump were to be re-elected, he wouldterminate the Constitution and establish authoritarian rule.
Concern Over Judicial Norms
The reaction of many legal professionals and experts has placed focus on the implications of a former president being held in contempt. These experts arguethe issue is less about Trump as an individual and more about the precedent it sets for future interactions between the judiciary and the executive branch. Many legal minds contrast allegations against Trump with allegations against Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, and Bill Clinton, pointing out that political norms have historically prevented prosecuting political figures.
Critics of Trump argue the Trump prosecutions are justified and fair. They insist Trump's posts on social media could potentially influence the jury and witnesses. They applaud the judge's decision to hold Trump in contempt, arguing his conduct, rather than the tail itself, breaks norms. Some express hope this ruling could lead to further legal consequences for Trump, including potential jail time.
Free Speech Worries
Many are also framing the contempt charge as a free speech violation. They say the former president should be able to express his views without interference. This group believes the gag order is an example of judicial overreach and call for the fines to be returned.
Some argue the actions of Judge Merchan are part of a broader conspiracy to undermine Trump and his campaign. They have also expressed concern that the gag order extends to Trump's campaign, which they see as an infringement on political speech. There are repeated concerns that political actors are attempting to influence the election by silencing Trump and the American people have a right to hear from Trump himself.
There are also reactions that do not neatly fit into the pro-Trump or anti-Trump categories. Some voters say the issue is not as much about free speech as it is about the right to a fair trial. Others have expressed concern about the potential implications of the ruling for future cases. They say it could set a dangerous precedent for limiting free speech in the context of legal proceedings.
Joe Biden's plan to effectively ban coal power plants is a contentious issue for Americans. MIG Reports analysis shows voter opinions on this matter are largely influenced by their beliefs about energy production, energy costs, and the environment. Additionally, it seems many Americans remain unaware of the ramifications of Biden’s unilateral action, given international conflict dominating social media and news coverage.
Online discussions which favor Biden's plan frame it as a necessary step towards sustainability and combating climate change. Those who hold this view often highlight the benefits of green energy, such as solar and wind power, in terms of its environmental impact and potential cost savings. They advocate for continuing to develop renewable energy technologies and infrastructure. They also express optimism about the potential for these sources to replace traditional fossil fuels.
Many others oppose Biden's coal regulation plan, often citing concerns about its impact on the economy and energy costs. This group frequently points to the role of fossil fuels in supporting American energy independence, as well as the jobs and economic activity generated by the oil and gas industry. They express concerns about the potential for green energy technologies to drive up energy costs, often arguing for a more balanced approach that includes both renewable and traditional energy sources.
There is also a group expressing skepticism of the green energy movement, viewing it as a political agenda rather than a practical solution to energy and environmental challenges. They argue the push for green energy overlooks its environmental impact and the cost of producing and disposing of renewable energy technologies, such as solar panels and wind turbines.
Energy Production
There seems to be a divide in which some push for aggressive measures to tackle climate change. Others voice concerns about potential economic implications and energy costs. A considerable number of Americans are calling for the expansion of nuclear power plants, asserting they are the most feasible solution to meet the country's energy demands while reducing carbon emissions. Many are hopeful toward Jigar Shah, the director of the U.S. Energy Department’s Loan Programs Office, highlighting the possibility of reactivating dormant nuclear power plants.
Simultaneously, there is vehement opposition to fracking due to its alleged environmental impact. Some voters criticize New York Governor Kathy Hochul for considering its use. Various people point out the irony of politicians celebrating natural parks while supporting fracking.
Despite this, there are voices of skepticism regarding the feasibility and environmental implications of renewable energy sources. Some claim renewable energy production is insufficient to meet the country's energy and fuel needs, arguing that nuclear power and natural gas are more reliable alternatives.
Nancy Pelosi recently appeared on MSNBC with Katy Tur, discussing Biden’s allegedly strong job growth numbers. Pelosi claimed Biden has created nine million jobs during his administration. In the exchange that followed, Tur asserted that job losses during Trump’s administration were due to COVID, rather than Trump’s policies.
Reactions to the interaction have split voters in an interesting way, with Republicans echoing Tur’s statement and Democrats siding with Pelosi. While reactions to the MSNBC exchange correspond with partisan divides, many Democratic voters are criticizing Tur and MSNBC for allegedly defending former President Trump.
This event suggests Democratic hatred for Trump may overcome ideological alignment with mainstream media outlets like MSNBC, which is widely viewed as left-leaning. Republicans point out that even a struggling economy and poor job prospects may not unify voters on contrasting narratives and political interpretations.
Following the exchange between Pelosi and Tur, jobs sentiment toward Trump and Biden flipped, with Trump slightly surpassing Biden in approval.
Sentiment toward MSNBC among all voters sits at 41%, with “propaganda,” “censorship,” and “fake news” among the top media-related discussion words.
Criticism of MSNBC and Katy Tur
Many voters across party lines are frustrated with MSNBC, especially Katy Tur. Democrats who agree with Nancy Pelosi’s accusation of Tur acting as a Trump apologist say Tur and the network promote a right-leaning bias. They appreciate Pelosi's criticism of Tur, and some have even called for Tur's replacement on MSNBC.
Conservative voters tend to assert Tur made a valid point about job losses during COVID, but still criticize MSNBC for its leftist bias. This group is more likely to discuss the general state of the economy and job market, with concerns about potential layoffs, increased unemployment, and concerns about inflation.
Following this contentious event, voters of all party affiliations express distrust and dissatisfaction with mainstream media, including MSNBC. A common criticism accuses the network of pushing narratives that align with certain political agendas.
Views of Nancy Pelosi
Interestingly, the exchange did not seem to negatively impact Nancy Pelosi’s approval. Many voters view Pelosi as a strong, assertive figure who challenges perceived bias in the media and unhesitatingly voices her opinions. Some Democrats thanked Speaker Pelosi for criticizing Katy Tur for defending Trump's job loss record.
However, many Republican voters are critical of Pelosi's comments, accusing her of undermining Trump's economic and jobs record. They argue Trump achieved significant job growth and that Pelosi is trying to manipulate the narrative to discredit him. These voters are mostly conservative and are generally opposed to Pelosi’s policies.
While partisan disagreement persists, there appears to be a consensus among both conservative and liberal voters that Pelosi is a skilled political operator. For conservatives, this manifests as critique of her as a master manipulator. For liberals, it is expressed as grudging respect for her ability to get things done.
Despite Republican criticism, Nancy Pelosi’s nation approval increased slightly in the last few days, reaching 50% on April 30.
VP Kamala Harris’s recent appearance on Drew Barrymore's show appears to be drawing criticism and ridicule online. Discussions seem to be dominated by people who are highly critical of Harris and the Biden administration, with a few voices of support.
Barrymore’s comment that Harris should be “Momala” of the nation – a nickname her stepchildren gave her – was met with criticism and ridicule from many voters who poked fun at both Barrymore and Harris. There are also comments criticizing the Vice President’s recognizable laugh and what voters describe as her incomprehensible rhetoric. Many also regularly criticize mainstream media and celebrities for their obvious and cringeworthy political bias.
Harris claimed her laughter is a point of contention for many critics, but insisting the criticism she receives for it amuses her. The conversations seem to reflect the typical petty nature of political discourse, where personal quirks can become a focal point.
Drew Barrymore to Kamala Harris: “We need you to be ‘Momala’ of the country” 🤮
The discussion about VP Kamala Harris, her laugh, and her confusing way of speaking seems to be divided by political affiliation. Democratic voters say they appreciate her strength and determination, praising the diversity she brings to the White House. In general, they tend to dismiss assertions that Harris is not well spoken or has a grating personality.
More right leaning voters often criticize her, saying she’s a failure and accuse her of neglecting her duties. They sometimes refer to her as being audibly illiterate and claim she rarely speaks coherent sentences. Republicans often brand her as an international embarrassment. Some even call her "Kamala Word-Salad Harris," implying her way of speaking is full of meaningless buzzwords.
As for her laugh, one voter says it's "not funny anymore," suggesting they find it irritating or inappropriate. Many seem to feel her laugh is too frequent, too loud, or not genuine. However, it's important to note that these comments are subjective and do not represent everyone's opinion.
Overall, the discussion seems to be highly influenced by political views. Most people's perceptions of Harris seem to largely depend on whether they align with her politically.
Overall Disapproval Toward VP Harris
A common concern for the Democratic Party in recent years has been poor approval ratings for VP Harris.
In the last two weeks, her approval has been sinking, even with a dramatic increase in mentions of her online.
Just a day after her Drew Barrymore appearance went viral online, approval for VP Harris dropped to 37% nationally.
According to MIG Reports data, some of the most common observations about Harris include:
Criticism of her Laugh: Many say her laugh does not lend to the seriousness or impact of her public image, coming off as fake or ill-timed.
Accusations of Incompetence: Many voters view Harris as ineffective in her political career, particularly in her handling of the southern border crisis.
Support for Re-election: Despite the criticism, some Democratic voters still support VP Harris and President Biden, saying they plan to vote for them.
Concerns about Zionism: More progressive Democrats raise concerns about Harris's perceived support for Israel. They view her stance as Zionism.
Questions of Honesty: Some voters accuse Harris of lying about her support for the U.S. Constitution and gaslighting the public on certain issues.
MIG Reports analysis of the White House Correspondent's Dinner and Biden's attacks on Trump reveals Americans are conflicted, viewing Trump and Biden very differently. While some people seem to enjoy Biden's jabs at Trump, considering them either humorous or justified, many others believe they reflect poorly on Biden and show a lack of professionalism. This contrasts with Trump's recent successful public appearances, generating voter positivity.
Americans are focused on current ongoing foreign entanglements, a border crisis, and student unrest on campuses across the country. Much of the online commentary questions Biden’s image, including his cognitive function to seeming out-of-touch with American voters.
Many voters express concerns over Biden's fitness for office, with some calling for his impeachment and criticizing his administration's policies and actions. Several comments mention the failed impeachment inquiry against Biden, highlighting how some people believe it was doomed from the start due to lack of substantial evidence.
There is a clear division of opinion regarding Biden's reelection. Some express fervent support for Biden and his administration, intending to vote for him again in 2024. Others are vehemently against the idea of a second Biden term, citing issues such as his approval ratings and their dissatisfaction with his performance.
The White House Correspondent's Dinner appears to have been a significant event for many in the media and beltway, although average voters seem less interested. Some people appreciated Biden's remarks, while many found them distasteful or inappropriate.
Several discussions revealed support for Biden remains unmoved by the traditional Washington D.C. event with the overall sentiment leaning more towards criticism. Voters express concerns over Biden's competency and calls for his impeachment being frequently raised.
The discourse surrounding election integrity, particularly in relation to Secretary Antony Blinken's claim about China interfering in U.S. elections, is contentious. The sentiments expressed fall along partisan lines and the intensity of these sentiments seems to have escalated after Blinken's claim.
Prior to Blinken's comment, discussion was centered mostly on allegations of domestic election fraud. The 2020 presidential election is still a highlight among many voter conversations. There are still accusations of criminal activity, with many blaming the former president, Donald Trump, for orchestrating a conspiracy to influence the election. This was a recurrent theme in many online comments.
Overall, sentiment toward election integrity is largely negative, with many expressing anger, frustration, and a sense of betrayal. Voter comments suggest a deep-seated mistrust in the electoral system and the political establishment on both sides. There are also calls for ensuring fair elections, with some suggesting measures like paper ballots and identification requirements.
After Blinken's claim, the discourse became even more heated. Allegations of election fraud continue, with some now also linking them to foreign interference, particularly from China. Sentiment is still largely negative, but there is now also a sense of fear and urgency. Many express the need for immediate action to protect the integrity of U.S. elections.
Based on MIG Reports data, most of the public is more worried about domestic interference than foreign interference in the 2024 election. This is evident from numerous references to the 2020 election, during which many allege domestic fraud was a significant issue.
There is a strong narrative among Republicans around a belief that the election was stolen. Some blame key figures in the Republican party for not supporting Donald Trump. Democrats seem more likely to be skeptical that Trump himself attempted to tamper with the election and secure an illegitimate presidency against the will of the people.
Texas voter reactions to the police response to protesters at University of Texas in Austin are varied. MIG Reports analysis shows political polarization echoing national politics and different perspectives on the issue.
Support and Critique of Texas Police Response
Some Texans support the police actions and arrests during the campus protests, viewing the demonstrations as a threat to public safety, and an expression of antisemitism. This group, often expresses pro-Trump sentiments, consider the protests to be hate-filled and believe students engaging in such activities should face severe consequences, including expulsion. They also accuse the protesters of propagandizing the situation and manipulating media coverage. Some suggest the protests are being funded by left-wing activists such as George Soros. They believe a robust response, like that seen under the Trump administration, is necessary to hinder such activities and prevent the kind of protests which recently shut down bridges and streets.
On the other hand, some voters criticize the police response, viewing it as an infringement on the protesters' First Amendment rights. They argue colleges have always been a hub for protests and the current response is politically biased. These voters often contrast the police response to anti-Israel protests with the response to predominantly white, far-right groups. They express concern about potential violent outcomes, referencing historical events like the Kent State shootings. They also criticize the political focus on Trump, arguing it distracts from the immediate issues at hand.
The division in Texas voter reactions reflect broader political and ideological tensions in the country. This division is likely to influence voting behavior, party affiliations, and political activism in the state. It also suggests any policy or legal responses to the protests and police actions will be highly contentious and potentially polarizing.
Reactions to Governor Abbot’s Comments
A significant part of the online discourse revolves around Governor Greg Abbott's purported stance towards the protesters. Some suggest he was planning to arrest those expressing support for Hamas, a claim that received mixed reactions. Others expressed outrage, viewing this as an infringement on free speech rights, while others appeared to support the move, arguing there is no place for antisemitism in Texas.
The police's reaction to the protests has also been controversial. There have been reports of state troopers and police officers making more than 20 arrests on campus, and many charged with trespassing. Law enforcement’s heavy-handed response has sparked outrage among some Texas voters who argue that it is an infringement on the students' constitutional rights.
Predictably, this sentiment appears to be contributing to a heightened sense of frustration and injustice among some students and supporters of the pro-Palestine movement. This feeling of being used as political pawns could potentially fuel further protests, escalating tensions between students, university authorities, and law enforcement.
Furthermore, there are concerns strong-handed law enforcement, including the use of batons and arrests, could have long-term repercussions on student trust in police. Not only could this exacerbate tensions on college campuses, but it could also impact wider public perceptions of the police.
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)