Censorship happens in the blink of an eye

Thunderian

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
7,516
I am not sure if people appreciate how important freedom of speech is, and how quickly and easily it can be taken away. Whether or not we agree with each other on anything else, we must agree on this.

Censorship happens in the blink of an eye
Two weeks ago, I tweeted a triptych that read: “How censorship happens: a story in three parts.” The first image was of a recent Vice headline stating that Facebook was moving to ban white nationalism and white separatism. The second was a tweet by left-wing activist Anthony Watson referring to Quillette as a “right-wing, white-nationalist website.” The third was a tweet thread in which two Canadian academics speak about monitoring and making a list of Canadians who dared to publish with Quillette.​
How censorship happens. A story in three parts: pic.twitter.com/4h38xOjLyu
— Barrett Wilson (@BarrettWilson6) March 31, 2019

Censorship happens as quickly as one can construct a false syllogism. And right now would be a very good time for us to start paying attention to where and how it’s happening.​
Facebook’s founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg penned a recent op-ed in the Washington Post in which he advocated for a laws against what he refers to as “harmful content” as well as international laws to monitor and regulate the internet. “It’s time to update these rules [of the internet] to define clear responsibilities for people,” Zuckerberg said.​
Of course, big tech is not waiting for the laws they crave to take action. Twitter, Facebook, YouTube have all deplatformed controversial figures such as Alex Jones, Faith Goldy, and Milo Yiannopoulos. These precedents have then been used to ban perfectly mainstream and reasonable figures like Meghan Murphy, a feminist who committed the high crime of “misgendering” on Twitter. She’s not the only one. Gender critical voices are routinely banned on Twitter, while their opposition is free to libel and level threats of violence with no administrative consequences.​
It seems that the rush to censor coincides with major tragedies in the world. Or, perhaps the censors among us exploit tragedies in order to achieve their goals of making our culture antiseptic. The desires of speech-denying ideologues line up perfectly with big tech companies, who are primarily interested in manifesting their dominance in marketplaces worldwide, not adhering to ethical standards.​
As the regressive censors continue to dance with their corporate partners, it’s never been clearer that we need more speech and more platforms.​
Take, for instance, the rush to smear conservative commentator Ben Shapiro in the wake of the Notre Dame Cathedral tragedy. Shapiro tweeted: “Absolutely heartbreaking. A magnificent monument to Western civilization collapsing” He added a few follow-up tweets stressing the importance of God and Judeo-Christian tradition.​
Absolutely heartbreaking. A magnificent monument to Western civilization collapsing. https://t.co/UajArjkt2g
— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) April 15, 2019

As a result, Washington Post contributor Talia Levin spat out an incoherent hot take claiming that Shapiro was stoking racial tensions: “Given the already-raging rumors about potential Muslim involvement, these tweets evoked the specter of a war between Islam and the West that is already part of numerous far-right narratives,” she wrote.​
When Shapiro punched back on Twitter, Media Matters got involved. For those who aren’t aware, Media Matters is the powerful woke-scold organization that regularly boycotts and slimes prominent conservatives in the name of progress.​
Fuck you and the burro you rode in on
— Media Matters (@mmfa) April 16, 2019

“Fuck you and the burro you rode on.” There it is. These are the words of the “prestigious” organization that wants to keep us safe from dangerous language. The tweet was properly ratioed, and the Washington Post smear backfired this time, but if Levin had her way, the “trust and safety” teams of big tech would be holding meetings to figure out how to get Shapiro off of their platforms.​
After the New Zealand mosque shooting, a major bookstore banned Jordan Peterson’s self-help book, 12 Rules for Life, in a completely ill-advised attempt to to keep their culture safe. Of course, the irony was that Peterson’s work is specifically effective in helping young men sort out their lives and avoid the pitfalls of radicalization. Thanks to the voices of reasonable people, Peterson’s book was reinstated.​
The censors among us start out by targeting Alex Jones or Faith Goldy or whoever they feel they can safely say is a conspiracy theorist or a white supremacist. But they don’t stop there. If they had their way, they would never stop. They simply need those people for precedent. Did you develop an appreciation of Western civilization by listening to Ben Shapiro? You’re a white supremacist. Did you clean your room and straighten out your life thanks to Dr. Peterson’s book? You’re a white supremacist. Did you publish an essay with Quillette? You’re a white supremacist.​
We can all clearly see the game that they’re playing, and we can’t let them win. We need to speak out while we still can.​
 

polymoog

Superstar
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
7,116
https://www.activistpost.com/2019/04/splinternet-eu-censorship-ramps-up-with-acta-2-while-uk-passes-terror-law-porn-law-and-introduces-first-internet-regulation-agency.html

bold is my emphasis.

UK Insane Terrorism Law
If all that wasn’t enough, the UK has also passed one of the most draconian pieces of legislation on viewing terrorist propaganda in the history of the Internet.
The new law has been deemed a “thought crime” by United Nations inspector Professor Joe Cannataci who has said it seemed “arbitrary” and added: “It seems to be pushing a bit too much towards thought crime…the difference between forming the intention to do something and then actually carrying out the act is still fundamental to criminal law.”
A number of new rules mean people can be jailed for viewing terrorist propaganda online, entering “designated areas” abroad, and making “reckless expressions” of support for certain groups.
The designated areas have not been defined by the government yet; however, they are expected to include territory controlled by terrorist groups and war zones throughout the Middle East. Although, the law has an exception for individuals who were forced involuntarily to remain in one of those areas.
After NGOs raised human rights concerns, further exemptions include humanitarian work, journalism, and funerals.
The government also lengthened prison sentences for several terror offenses, ended automatic early release for those convicted of terrorist actions and put them under a stricter monitoring process after they are freed from prison.
UK Home Secretary Sajid Javid said the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019 gives “police the powers they need to disrupt terrorist plots earlier and ensure that those who seek to do us harm face just punishment.”
“As we saw in the deadly attacks in London and Manchester in 2017, the threat from terrorism continues to evolve and so must our response, which is why these vital new measures have been introduced,” Javid added.
A detailed report by the Joint Committee on Human Rights also stated that the offense being punishable by up to 15 years in prison, “is a breach of the right to receive information and risks criminalizing legitimate research and curiosity.”
The obvious question one is left wondering is who decides what is “terrorist propaganda”? Is it only defined as ISIS/al-Qaeda, or is the definition much broader to possibly include protesters against the government in the future? We will have to of course wait and see.
UK Creation of First Internet Regulator
This all comes on the heels of the UK wanting to establish the world’s first independent regulator to keep social media companies in check, as CNET reported.
This agency will be designed to make the Internet a safer place. The new regulation firm was jointly announced by the Home Office and Department of Culture, Media and Sport. The government white paper, titled Online Harms, published Monday in the UK, outlines “plans for a world-leading package of online safety measures.”
“The White Paper proposes establishing in law a new duty of care towards users, which will be overseen by an independent regulator. Companies will be held to account for tackling a comprehensive set of online harms, ranging from illegal activity and content to behaviors which are harmful but not necessarily illegal,” the release reads.
All social media companies, file-hosting sites, online forums, messaging services, and search engines will be required to tackle the following issues:
  • Incitement of violence and the spread of violent (including terrorist) content
  • Encouragement of self-harm or suicide
  • The spread of disinformation and fake news
  • Cyberbullying
  • Children’s access to inappropriate material
  • Child exploitation and abuse content
While putting an age-restriction filter behind online porn may seem like the right thing to do, introducing an upload filter, introducing an Internet regulator agency and punishing the right to receive information risks punishing legitimate uses of the free Internet. Because of these new measures combined with systems already in place, we are only one step away from the greater tyranny of the death of freedom of information.
Numerous digital rights groups have stated the harsh regulation regime proposed could lead to free speech and privacy violations.
“This is an unprecedented attack on freedom of speech that will see internet giants monitoring the communications of billions and censoring lawful speech,” Big Brother Watch said in a tweet.
 

polymoog

Superstar
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
7,116
i got my games magazine in the mail today.

first page is an intro by the editor: welcome to games mag.... blah blah... covid...blah blah... its been a memorable year.... blah blah... "here in the US, its a presidential year... you can find articles all over on election, but you wont find any of those here."

great! finally, some common sense! just stay apolitical! why is that hard to do???

next paragraph:

"in other newsworthy events... the scrabble players assoc. has removed 200 offensive words from its official word list. she (editor) says there is an editorial written by scott appel entitled "your word against mine" which she called a thought provoking piece.

so, i flip right to that page. 3/4 of the article is simply news. then, this guy decides to add in his two cents into the mix. "my personal belief is that this step is absolutely the right move.... slur words are out of place and not worth the guilt i felt playing them (regardless of whether or not my opponent found them troubling). many scrabble club regulars have reported instances of new players leaving (and never returning) upon learning that slur words were permitted."
he goes on....
"does the absence of slurs leave crossword solvers feeling like theyre missing out on more interesting puzzles? and is it not telling that when an article summarizing an important tournament game is is written here or in any other periodical, any offensive words played in the game must be edited out? ... you can argue that those tools are just words to score points, but theyre still offensive once anyone considers them to be so. true, removing a few hundred words from the scrabble word list does nothing to actually further the BLM movement, but why not err on the side of minimal offensiveness?"

i got through that paragraph, flipped to the front and called customer service to cancel my subscription.
(incidentally, the operator i spoke to was equally incensed.)

get woke, go broke.
 

Lisa

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
20,288
I’m reminded of the phrase...if there’s a will there’s a way.
 

Lurking009

Star
Joined
Mar 19, 2018
Messages
1,691
i got my games magazine in the mail today.

first page is an intro by the editor: welcome to games mag.... blah blah... covid...blah blah... its been a memorable year.... blah blah... "here in the US, its a presidential year... you can find articles all over on election, but you wont find any of those here."

great! finally, some common sense! just stay apolitical! why is that hard to do???

next paragraph:

"in other newsworthy events... the scrabble players assoc. has removed 200 offensive words from its official word list. she (editor) says there is an editorial written by scott appel entitled "your word against mine" which she called a thought provoking piece.

so, i flip right to that page. 3/4 of the article is simply news. then, this guy decides to add in his two cents into the mix. "my personal belief is that this step is absolutely the right move.... slur words are out of place and not worth the guilt i felt playing them (regardless of whether or not my opponent found them troubling). many scrabble club regulars have reported instances of new players leaving (and never returning) upon learning that slur words were permitted."
he goes on....
"does the absence of slurs leave crossword solvers feeling like theyre missing out on more interesting puzzles? and is it not telling that when an article summarizing an important tournament game is is written here or in any other periodical, any offensive words played in the game must be edited out? ... you can argue that those tools are just words to score points, but theyre still offensive once anyone considers them to be so. true, removing a few hundred words from the scrabble word list does nothing to actually further the BLM movement, but why not err on the side of minimal offensiveness?"

i got through that paragraph, flipped to the front and called customer service to cancel my subscription.
(incidentally, the operator i spoke to was equally incensed.)

get woke, go broke.
Oh ffs. Woke video games are bad enough, but Scrabble too???
 

polymoog

Superstar
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
7,116
Oh ffs. Woke video games are bad enough, but Scrabble too???

the article said it started in the 1990s when some art dealer said it was offensive, etc., and she finally got some traction as the PC culture gained momentum. the operator asked if i wanted a call back from them. i said sure, but that i didnt want the guy fired for his warped beliefs (then id be as fouled up as these progressive lunatics with their cancel culture); i either want it APOLITICAL or 100% balanced, preferably apolitical so i can just do the puzzles and not have to think about the political drama.
if he asks me what i want to make it better, ill ask for the right to write MY side of the argument and force them to publish it!

lets see what happens.
 

Lisa

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
20,288
i got my games magazine in the mail today.

first page is an intro by the editor: welcome to games mag.... blah blah... covid...blah blah... its been a memorable year.... blah blah... "here in the US, its a presidential year... you can find articles all over on election, but you wont find any of those here."

great! finally, some common sense! just stay apolitical! why is that hard to do???

next paragraph:

"in other newsworthy events... the scrabble players assoc. has removed 200 offensive words from its official word list. she (editor) says there is an editorial written by scott appel entitled "your word against mine" which she called a thought provoking piece.

so, i flip right to that page. 3/4 of the article is simply news. then, this guy decides to add in his two cents into the mix. "my personal belief is that this step is absolutely the right move.... slur words are out of place and not worth the guilt i felt playing them (regardless of whether or not my opponent found them troubling). many scrabble club regulars have reported instances of new players leaving (and never returning) upon learning that slur words were permitted."
he goes on....
"does the absence of slurs leave crossword solvers feeling like theyre missing out on more interesting puzzles? and is it not telling that when an article summarizing an important tournament game is is written here or in any other periodical, any offensive words played in the game must be edited out? ... you can argue that those tools are just words to score points, but theyre still offensive once anyone considers them to be so. true, removing a few hundred words from the scrabble word list does nothing to actually further the BLM movement, but why not err on the side of minimal offensiveness?"

i got through that paragraph, flipped to the front and called customer service to cancel my subscription.
(incidentally, the operator i spoke to was equally incensed.)

get woke, go broke.
Can’t leave anything alone can they?

1597778816991.jpeg

1597778852426.jpeg
 

Hubert

Established
Joined
Jun 28, 2017
Messages
385
Conservatives always want a "marketplace of ideas" until their ideas are rejected, then they scream censorship. I'm sorry, not really, that your ideas are fading from the mainstream, but there is no conspiracy. people hear your ideas, and are simply rejecting them.
 

Lisa

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
20,288
Conservatives always want a "marketplace of ideas" until their ideas are rejected, then they scream censorship. I'm sorry, not really, that your ideas are fading from the mainstream, but there is no conspiracy. people hear your ideas, and are simply rejecting them.
I don’t think their ideas are rejected..some people have many followers but get cancelled anyway because they don’t ‘think’ the right thoughts. The only thoughts that seem to be the right ones are leftist/socialist and communistic ones. In America though...that’s not a majority opinion...and so they try to take away the majority opinion and replace it with the minority opinion and try to make that look like the majority opinion..its called propaganda and it can be pretty effective.

However..I also think that people will think up other ways like parler and other social media sites to go to...so I’m not sure someone can be totally cancelled.
 

polymoog

Superstar
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
7,116
Conservatives always want a "marketplace of ideas" until their ideas are rejected, then they scream censorship. I'm sorry, not really, that your ideas are fading from the mainstream, but there is no conspiracy. people hear your ideas, and are simply rejecting them.
ill ask VC to remove your post since it is not "inclusive" enough, not from an "official" source, and most of all, i am offended. youll also need to apologize for your racist tone youve taken with me.

its you leftists that created the cancel culture, not the right. in any free speech arena on the internet, your politically correct garbage gets torn to shreds in an argument, which is why you people cling to censorship. the left can only win the rigged game with censorship of free speech.
im certainly not worried since the left is already beginning to consume itself.
 

cjkkw

Established
Joined
Jul 2, 2020
Messages
193
ill ask VC to remove your post since it is not "inclusive" enough, not from an "official" source, and most of all, i am offended. youll also need to apologize for your racist tone youve taken with me.

its you leftists that created the cancel culture, not the right. in any free speech arena on the internet, your politically correct garbage gets torn to shreds in an argument, which is why you people cling to censorship. the left can only win the rigged game with censorship of free speech.
im certainly not worried since the left is already beginning to consume itself.
u can't censor jesuschrist.
 

Hubert

Established
Joined
Jun 28, 2017
Messages
385
ill ask VC to remove your post since it is not "inclusive" enough, not from an "official" source, and most of all, i am offended. youll also need to apologize for your racist tone youve taken with me.

its you leftists that created the cancel culture, not the right. in any free speech arena on the internet, your politically correct garbage gets torn to shreds in an argument, which is why you people cling to censorship. the left can only win the rigged game with censorship of free speech.
im certainly not worried since the left is already beginning to consume itself.
VC owns this platform. It's his, or her, right to remove anything from it they choose to. It won't hurt my feelings, and I won't be screaming censorship because I actually understand what free speech is.

Again I'm sorry, no I'm not, that conservatives are losing in the marketplace of ideas but I don't care to coddle snowflakes who are bothered by their growing irrelevance.
 

Hubert

Established
Joined
Jun 28, 2017
Messages
385
I don’t think their ideas are rejected..some people have many followers but get cancelled anyway because they don’t ‘think’ the right thoughts. The only thoughts that seem to be the right ones are leftist/socialist and communistic ones. In America though...that’s not a majority opinion...and so they try to take away the majority opinion and replace it with the minority opinion and try to make that look like the majority opinion..its called propaganda and it can be pretty effective.

However..I also think that people will think up other ways like parler and other social media sites to go to...so I’m not sure someone can be totally cancelled.
It is actually the majority opinion in America. That's why trump lost the popular vote by over three million. That's why the "canceling" works. People don't want to defend conservative ideas because, once you go past the surface, most conservative ideas are indefensible.
 

Johnny5

Veteran
Joined
Jun 20, 2019
Messages
575
It is actually the majority opinion in America. That's why trump lost the popular vote by over three million. That's why the "canceling" works. People don't want to defend conservative ideas because, once you go past the surface, most conservative ideas are indefensible.
I think you need a mirror.
 

Lisa

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
20,288
It is actually the majority opinion in America. That's why trump lost the popular vote by over three million. That's why the "canceling" works. People don't want to defend conservative ideas because, once you go past the surface, most conservative ideas are indefensible.
It’s the leftist ideas that are indefensible..which is why they think they need a virus and constant riots to try to win an election..which will fail because most Americans don’t like totalitarianism or violence. The left will find out when trump wins in the landslide coming in November...they only pretend to be ‘winning’.
 
Top