111–120 of 137 posts
Does it count as ironic that I can’t watch the segment here in Australia because “the uploader has not made this available in your country”?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
George Orwell was against all kinds of authoritarianism. A large portion of the left has always disavowed authoritarianism as well, so there is no conflict here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I see your point, and although technically correct, the writer had a lot of words to choose from. For instance, if a nourishing lake had suddenly dried up, I'd use a different word. Perhaps devastating.
I see the word choice as more than technically correct. "Impressive" does not necessarily carry a positive connotation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think it's safe until we mention Winnie the Pooh. Woops. Context: in his China segment, Oliver asserts that China has banned Winnie the Pooh from the internet because it was used to mock the president. And then he (Oliver) used tons of Winnie the Pooh references. We already are seeing a lot of partisan arguments in this thread (as one could have expected, I guess). For my part, I don't care about the politics on th…
China is the world’s Factory. It also has a huge middle class population now. Basically the country is so rich, important and large, it doesn’t need to care about what the rest of the world thinks about it. Kind of like US. We have an idiot running the country, but we have a strong economy so anything goes. Chinese censorship is working so well, I bet a 100%, western nations will want to adopt its ideas.
But yet here it is taking childish actions against a comedian, trying to make him and his joke disapear just because their feelings got hurt by a winnie the poo story.
> It’s impressive to see the pace of Chinese censors. I'm not sure that impressive is the right term here...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think IPFS is uncensorable; if you have MITM on a user (like the Chinese government does), can't you just block any requests for a certain hash?
IPFS+Tor would solve that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The 20th century changed the meaning of the word to be more about manipulation, where as the original definition was neutral. [1] The manipulation suggested deceitfulness on the part of the party creating and distributing it. So it's one of these things where OP can use a politically charged word, and then claim it was used in the neutral voice. Personally, rather than have an argument about what amounts to "propagan…
I agree with most of your statement, but Oliver is most certainly deceitful, while also being biased. His deceit may not be deliberate (and we could come up with yet another term to denote deliberate deceitfulness), but it is often evident. His deceit is most evident on foreign affairs, which is not surprising given his devotion to orthodox, bi-partisan DC establishment foreign policy. His clips about Venezuela and S…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I squint and ignore the fact that personalities like Oliver have been doing their ideological-driven (rightly so IMO) comedy perspective bits for years I can see how how you could naively call that “propaganda”. However, the logical side of me can’t fathom how the reported events are anything remotely “propaganda”. They are legitimate things that free-press nations can discuss how they like, including laughing at…
John Oliver is correct but the lack of publication of competing viewpoints is what defines US (Democrat) propaganda. For example I’ve seen him state that the wage gap was 25%, straight face! that’s where the alternative viewpoints are sorely lacking and, when you learn the history of achors who have only questioned the credibility of this statistic, you can clearly say: Censorship is enforced with violence in USA.
Where? I've just seen his clip on the wage gap[1] and he says no such thing. Is there another clip?