You're coming off as a tad out of touch here, Grinner - and I should know, I am quite of touch myself. Like it or not, social media is now a very big part of a public figure's life. At least it is if they want to remain a public figure.
Cancel Culture
- Thread starter Buchan
- Start date
You're coming off as a tad out of touch here, Grinner - and I should know, I am quite of touch myself. Like it or not, social media is now a very big part of a public figure's life. At least it is if they want to remain a public figure.
How is this even possible. Wtf was all those book about!?
Cafe mod agreeing on censorship with all powerful tech companies
Last edited:
We should just cancel facebook and twitter. Cancel everyone
Surely this is just the inevitable consequence of pressure to sort their shit out that’s been building for years? All they needed was a tipping point.
When you see Qanon (a movement for which Facebook is almost entirely responsible) nutters literally invading Capitol Hill then you couldn’t ask for a more obvious straw to break the camel’s back. They could have got their house in order sooner, sure, but it’s really not difficult to find reasons for their recent actions without putting it all on the Dems winning the Senate (that’s the only significant recent political shift I can think of).
Basically you can’t blame centrists for everything.
EDIT: Although it does seem they’ve lost the run of themselves a bit. Over compensation in action.
Cafe mod agreeing on censorship with all powerful tech companies
They fear CAF cancellation from their tech overlords.
We're not talking about many public figures though. Parler users are mostly ignorant twats looking to spread their ignorance.
I'm not sure yet how comfortable I am with the likes of Amazon, Google, FB and Twitter holding so much power.
On the other hand, don't be an asshole and you're unlikely to get banned, right?
On the other hand, don't be an asshole and you're unlikely to get banned, right?
Thats just not how this is going to work. You know this
(i'm taking the first guy's word for it that the other guy was fired for political views and not anything specific)
Not sure how one can’t feel okay about someone involved in a felony receiving consequences from their actions. I would feel the same if the ideological roles were reversed.
Actions having consequences doesn’t always equate to cancel culture run amok.
E - I see you further elaborated on this particular situation. In no way should the internal due process of a termination be aborted due to the perceived severity of the infraction, but the process should certainly take place, CEO or minion within the company. Each have a responsibility to reflect positively on the company & not be a negative on it going forward.
I think I’ve changed my mind on deplatforming. I usually think the best way to challenge bad ideas is to let them speak and be challenged in public. However this pandemic has such an obvious link between bad ideas and bad outcomes it’s making me rethink this.
To me, this sort of call for deplatforming/cancelling is justified. Spreading lies which kill people. And they’re doing it by blinding people with science that is difficult to understand and very plausible to non-experts. Because I’m familiar with the science being discussed I can work out when they’re obviously bullshitting so have no problem with obvious charlatans like Prof Gupta being denied the chance to cause harm.
But that got me thinking about all the other charlatans spreading harmful ideas, cloaked in pseudo-science. To be consistent, I should also support them being denied a platform. I’m not sure why this didn’t occur to me before. Probably because I’m less clued in on social sciences, so basically much more gullible? Anyhoo. Deplatforming. I’m a convert.
To me, this sort of call for deplatforming/cancelling is justified. Spreading lies which kill people. And they’re doing it by blinding people with science that is difficult to understand and very plausible to non-experts. Because I’m familiar with the science being discussed I can work out when they’re obviously bullshitting so have no problem with obvious charlatans like Prof Gupta being denied the chance to cause harm.
But that got me thinking about all the other charlatans spreading harmful ideas, cloaked in pseudo-science. To be consistent, I should also support them being denied a platform. I’m not sure why this didn’t occur to me before. Probably because I’m less clued in on social sciences, so basically much more gullible? Anyhoo. Deplatforming. I’m a convert.
I’m I don’t think I’m there yet in terms of deplatforming (that’s new terminology for me).
one of the biggest issues are the algorithm’s used. So that if you express a view, or search for “I’m not getting a vaccination because there is pork in the vaccine”, I’d that you get get flooded with people/ ideas/ posts that are all very similar.
facebook in particular puts everyone in their own echo chamber.
some people do clearly want this, and want to converse with the similarly loopy. But it’s the people who perhaps have a moderately squeezed view of the world, who get ever more drawn into it - and they never see the other side of the argument. That’s worrying.
Can we cancel the CCP then please? Who in turn wants to cancel anyone who is critical of the regime.
I agree that in the case of coronavirus we are in a special situation where false information costs lives, but in life in general on other topics, I dont want a select group to essentially police what is acceptable thought, speech and discussion. For instance I don't want well informed and well meaning whistleblowers "cancelled". Such as this guy or Edward Snowden.
Last edited:
Well I'll be damned...
Tbf I haven't picked a side on this one. I believe in free speech but not unequivocally.Never too old to learn and change, afro
Now to convince you that PC has not actually gone mad...
It's a blunt instrument but I suspect it works quite well in a lot of cases, so should probably be considered as at least part of the solution.
On the plus side it definitely seems to have an impact on individuals (e.g. Milo whatshisname being hit financially) and reduces the growth of communities/content, at least in the short/medium term. On the negative side at least some of that community/content migrates elsewhere and becomes more hardened.
In some situations (and both Covid and vaccinations are probably among them) reducing the spread of the stupidity is probably worth allowing small pockets to become more hardened in their beliefs. That might not be the case in other situations though, where you think there's a natural limit on how widely a belief is likely to be adopted anyway and you're instead trying to address a small pocket of believers.
Good point.
I remember Julia Hartley Brewer being "cancelled" from attending the royal college of GP conference as a speaker/host due to her comments on agreeing with Enoch Powell's "predictions". I find her views and politics pretty vile.
Incidentally I don't think we should immediately jump to the deplatforming or cancelling even in the context of lockdown skeptics. I think there's a lot at stake, science is complicated. Getting ideas across of epidemiology is difficult. But I've seen this pandemic as largely a missed opportunity in terms of promoting scientific literacy.
Not that I'm saying that we shouldn't deplatform people like JHB who've said things like covid swabs have 90% false positive but rightly so their misinformation should be in the first instance be challenged and explained to. Largely a lot of what people like her and Toby Young have said has been challenged in arguments that have been articulate, patient by scientists and doctors on medtwitter. So no sympathy for calls for them to be cancelled now.
Also weirdly I think a lot of lack of pushback now is strict GMC guidelines on how medics use social media, and also the fact that there is right wing backlash to anybody who suggests deplatforming of charlatans or grifters by the likes of Guido Fawkes, Spiked etc and even the Mail which results in death threats etc
I know one of the medics on the panorma show regarding the PPE debacle and the abuse that resulted from articles like these horrified me
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...interviewed-five-medics-Labour-links-PPE.html
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic...d-ppe-broadcast-shows-much-need-transparency/
https://order-order.com/2020/04/28/panoramas-ppe-investigation-party-political-broadcast/
It’s not just Twatter where that happens, exactly the same happens on here.
Watched Friedkin Uncut last night and this popped up when talking about his films cruising
Got any good examples?
Blood in the water. Podcasts and competing networks up next.
Censor me tech daddies.
The second one is especially facepalm considering CNN - and plenty of other outlets, only picking on them because it's a CNN presenter's tweet- engaged in plenty of 'election denialism' across multiple years. They just did the corporate approved version.
Censor me tech daddies.
The second one is especially facepalm considering CNN - and plenty of other outlets, only picking on them because it's a CNN presenter's tweet- engaged in plenty of 'election denialism' across multiple years. They just did the corporate approved version.
I assume there will be huge outrage about this.
polish exams stand up against cancel culture (stolen from twitter)
go off queen
That thumbnail..
Have y’all folks seen the cancel culture uproar over Danileigh’s song, Yellow bone?
Yep The Shaderoom spoke of it yesterday.
Is the backlash because it's shit?
Well deserved too.
Cancel culture has become politicised to the point that it is now a caricatured enemy of itself. It is a proxy site for fostering further animosity between the right and/or left.
Every incident, cancellation, retraction should be judged on its own independent context and circumstance.
I find terms like 'cancel culture' serve little purpose apart from perpetuating ideological polarisation in an already grossly divided world.
Every incident, cancellation, retraction should be judged on its own independent context and circumstance.
I find terms like 'cancel culture' serve little purpose apart from perpetuating ideological polarisation in an already grossly divided world.
Rupert Murdoch says media needs to 'confront wave of censorship' and slams 'awful woke orthodoxy' | Daily Mail Online
Man who controls the media complaining about censorship. This could have probably gone in the hypernormalisation thread too.
Man who controls the media complaining about censorship. This could have probably gone in the hypernormalisation thread too.
If there was one person I could wipe from history Rupert Murdoch would be a big contender. Such an unfathomably awful person and the amount of harm he's responsible for.