KO MEP Janina Ochojska shared a photo of a roasted duck on the X platform with the caption: “15 October, National Thanksgiving Day. The whole country is roasting duck. Ochojska’s post sparked a storm online and drew heavy criticism for the author.”
The idea behind the post resonated with many who view it as a reminder of a significant day in Polish history, and as a call to honor the commitments made to the country. Some friends had already broached the topic, even though the day is not officially designated as a national Thanksgiving holiday.
– she wrote Janina Ochojska in the message accompanying the photo.
A storm on the internet after Ochojska’s entry
Online commentators reacted with shock and embarrassment to Ochojska’s post, many pointing to a potential reference to Jarosław Kaczyński, the leader of PiS. The online debate quickly shifted to questions about tone, intent, and the appropriateness of political messages tied to national commemorations.
Some commenters used bold language to describe the post as a display of cultural arrogance, while others expressed disbelief that such a message would come from a member of the European Parliament who represents Poland on the national stage. The reaction reflected a broader concern about how political figures engage with memory, history, and holidays that carry emotional weight for many citizens.
Various voices weighed in on the issue, ranging from criticism to calls for restraint. A number of observers argued that public figures should model respectful discourse that unites rather than divides, especially on days meant to honor shared history and civic values. Others suggested that political figures are entitled to express opinions, but that doing so in the context of a national holiday risks alienating segments of the population and undermining the purpose of the observance.
Some commentators urged a return to civility, noting the harm that heated rhetoric can inflict on everyday people who are just trying to observe a day of significance. Others argued that controversy is an inevitable byproduct of a healthy democracy, where public figures are held to account for their statements and where debate can illuminate different perspectives about national memory and identity.
Emphatic reactions included concerns about moral judgment and the potential for manipulation through online discourse. Several readers warned that words spoken in public forums can shape perceptions for years to come, influencing how future generations remember the events in question. Others cautioned against conflating personal expression with collective memory, insisting that a national observance should privilege reflection, respect, and unity over disagreement and provocation.
There were also lighter notes, with some commenters joking about the symbolism of a duck and the idea of a feast as a metaphor for national resilience. Yet even these quips underscored the tension between cultural symbolism and political messaging on a day held in high regard by many citizens. A few posts framed the incident as a reminder that language matters, especially when it travels across platforms and generations, shaping how a nation remembers its past.
Overall, the online dialogue demonstrated how a single social media post can ignite a spectrum of responses, from praise to condemnation. It highlighted the challenges public figures face when navigating sensitive anniversaries and the delicate balance between expressing personal views and honoring a shared historical narrative. The incident served as a case study in how digital platforms amplify public sentiment and how quickly a moment can become a broader conversation about memory, identity, and political culture.
Analysts observed that national conversations around commemorative days benefit from measured, inclusive discourse. They emphasized the importance of distinguishing personal opinion from official policy, and of ensuring that celebrations, when they occur, maintain a focus on the values that bind citizens together. In the wake of the online storm, many urged readers to reflect on the responsibilities that come with public influence and to consider how language can either bridge divides or widen them.
In this climate, the incident underscored a recurring theme in contemporary public life: the rapid rise of opinion sharing in real time, and the enduring impact of words on public perception. The debate continued to unfold across social media, traditional media, and casual conversations, illustrating how a momentary post can stimulate a sustained, multi-faceted discussion about national memory, political lines, and the responsibilities of public figures toward the public they serve.