Censorship and the Mosque Shooting
-
@Kirwan said in Censorship and the Mosque Shooting:
Can’t even get basic facts like JP not being right wing accurate. Five minutes of research will have him discovering that considering actual right wingers hate his guts.
I didn't really know who the guy was until all this blew up. You mean to tell me he gets his photo taken with the wrong guy and all of MSM paint him as a alt-right wing advocate?
-
@canefan The idea is nice, probably something you'd hear JP say himself. But as others have said the way this jOuRNaliSt has no issue making incredibly slandourous statements without research is just typical of NZ media. I'm sure he'll be corrected in the comments...unless
-
@canefan Oh god no. But most western countries have semi mainstream media outlets which present some semblance of reality that goes against the regressive narrative. NZ doesn't seem to. It's either cancer or aids, you can pick one or both.
-
@Rembrandt said in Censorship and the Mosque Shooting:
@canefan Oh god no. But most western countries have semi mainstream media outlets which present some semblance of reality that goes against the regressive narrative. NZ doesn't seem to. It's either cancer or aids, you can pick one or both.
Then there are others that get their news via FB and Twitter. Everyone can take what they need to reinforce their own ideas. It's a funny old world we live in now. Mutual respect and understanding is getting harder to find
-
@canefan said in Censorship and the Mosque Shooting:
@Rembrandt said in Censorship and the Mosque Shooting:
@canefan Oh god no. But most western countries have semi mainstream media outlets which present some semblance of reality that goes against the regressive narrative. NZ doesn't seem to. It's either cancer or aids, you can pick one or both.
Then there are others that get their news via FB and Twitter. Everyone can take what they need to reinforce their own ideas. It's a funny old world we live in now. Mutual respect and understanding is getting harder to find
Yeah, social media is really bad for that. If you follow one person, you'll be suggested to follow others like them. Can pretty quickly build a solid echo chamber where all you read is opinions that reinforce your own ideas.
On the article, it's actually not bad apart from the smear on Peterson. You can't ban evil, and attempting to do so will only further embolden people like this. Hitler was banned from speaking at public events before he rose to prominence, and it just fed into his victimhood narrative (the ONLY man in Germany that is not allowed to speak!).
If you ban people's right to speech then all they have left is violence. We can't drive these ideas underground and then be surprised when violence ensues. The author of the article is right, we need to have actual discussions and debates with people that hold views like this. That's the only way to move forward.
-
@canefan said in Censorship and the Mosque Shooting:
@Rembrandt said in Censorship and the Mosque Shooting:
@canefan Oh god no. But most western countries have semi mainstream media outlets which present some semblance of reality that goes against the regressive narrative. NZ doesn't seem to. It's either cancer or aids, you can pick one or both.
Then there are others that get their news via FB and Twitter. Everyone can take what they need to reinforce their own ideas. It's a funny old world we live in now. Mutual respect and understanding is getting harder to find
That's true but I do have a little bit of hope, it's also never been easier to get another point of view on a subject if someone is willing. The more a typical person (not a zealot) becomes aware of the mistruths of particular organisations, institutions and individuals the less likely they will rely on them in the future. The only thing stopping that natural process is the censorship of sources that are telling truth.
Just looking at the msnbc ratings after the Mueller report, they are getting absolutely savaged. People are generally truth seekers and don't like being lied to.
-
@No-Quarter I worry about the universal truth that if you take away someone's voice, they only have fists to express themselves.
-
Oh good, I can't possibly see a downside here. I'm sure feelings of resentment and victimisation will just disappear when directed to an organisation approved by tech overlords.
No doubt facebook will be consistent in its approach and will take the same view toward other ethnicities. Dalai Lama and most of South African's ANC and EEF to lose their facebook privileges I'm sure.
-
@Rembrandt Stuff has introduced a bunch of new rules around comments, with stricter rules around what people can say and also deciding they won't open comments to a pretty long list of topics. They've also removed the ability to upvote/downvote.
I really don't think websites banning debate on particular topics is the right way to go about this.
Edit:
topics that are now off limits:
1080
allegations of criminality or misconduct
animal cruelty
beneficiaries
Christchurch mosque shootings of March 2019
court cases
domestic violence
fluoride
funerals
immigrants or refugees
Israel and Palestine
Kashmir
missing people
race
sexual orientation
suicide
Treaty of Waitangi
transgender issues
vaccination
vulnerable children -
@No-Quarter Its frustrating. But I guess our reality. Tech giants have huge influence on the world but are hardly qualified in using that influence in a responsible manner. If they want to go the 'ban' route then at the very least apply it regardless of race.
-
@No-Quarter The reality isn't that the topics are off limits, its disagreeing with whatever narrative stuff.co.nz pushes that is really what is driving this.
-
@Rembrandt and/or their willingness to invest in genuinely moderating the topics etc. But agree that it's more about their take on those issues
-
It does seem to me to be an over the top reaction to the shooting. Brenton Tarrant didn't get radicalised by engaging people in debate on a public forum, he sat in an echo chamber in the depths of 4chan and 8chan away from the rest of society.
I don't think these rules will pan out well for them. The comments sections will become very bland and I'd say a lot of people will stop bothering to engage.
-
@No-Quarter said in Censorship and the Mosque Shooting:
Brenton Tarrant didn't get radicalised by engaging people in debate on a public forum, he sat in an echo chamber in the depths of 4chan and 8chan away from the rest of society.
I'd say an argument could be made (but not legally in NZ..) that the suppression of honest public debate may have contributed to his actions.
-
Nazis! nazis everywhere!!! The ex-soldier suicide was an interesting story. He didn't want his gun taken from him..clearly his background made him feel a gun was a necessity for life.
It still doesn't feel right to me that people can be jailed for sharing a tweet, I don't even care if they tried to get past a facebook restriction, the censorship on facebook is so comical that it immediately makes it a game when they block a post. "Women don't have a penis" for example.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/111629288/arrests-after-police-raids-in-christchurch
-
@Rembrandt said in Censorship and the Mosque Shooting:
Nazis! nazis everywhere!!! The ex-soldier suicide was an interesting story. He didn't want his gun taken from him..clearly his background made him feel a gun was a necessity for life.
It still doesn't feel right to me that people can be jailed for sharing a tweet, I don't even care if they tried to get past a facebook restriction, the censorship on facebook is so comical that it immediately makes it a game when they block a post. "Women don't have a penis" for example.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/111629288/arrests-after-police-raids-in-christchurch
Stuff.co.nz had some shitcunt posting a whole bunch of comments that this guys plight was Jacindas fault because apparently the new gun laws made him uneasy.
It was outstanding "get some popcorn and read" stuff but it all got deleted unfortunately.
-
@MajorRage thought you would be interested in Peterson’s response to that t-shirt picture;
"I also have a strong belief that people should be allowed to express themselves as they see fit, and I haven't invoked a dress code at my lectures, feeling that free people who have taken the time and trouble to attend and travel and pay have the right (as they clearly do) to wear whatever they choose," he wrote in an email.
"Having said that, and despite the low base rate and my feelings about allowing those who attend my lectures their freedom of dress, I have now asked the company that handles the photos to politely ask those who are photographed with me to refrain from more provocative political garb, given that the fallout can be used by those who are not fond of me (a serious understatement) to capitalise on the opportunity the photos provide, particularly in isolation and context-free."
So basically saying as he believes in free speech he didn’t try to restrict that guy’s right to wear the t-shirt.
I think it’s smarter not to allow your enemies to use photos like that out of context, especially as people will just look at the picture and not the explanation.