171–180 of 304 posts
What are the odds this will teach the American left that censorship is not a good thing and lead them to stop demanding Google, Twitter, and Facebook ban every user who wants to reduce immigration? 1%? 0%?
I don't think this is a good comparison. The bans you are talking about (ignoring the hyperbole) are for hate speech. This is censhorship of critisicm of an authoritarian government. I don't think the two are remotely comparable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Don't hate the player, hate the game." It's possible to be ethical in a capitalist system. I don't believe it's acceptable to give them a free pass because they chose the option that might be the most profitable (and that's arguable).
It is possible, but capitalism often incentives the opposite.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't claim the United States is perfect, but it certainly isn't mass incarcerating members of a peaceful religious group and harvesting their organs, so I won't agree to your false equivalence.
> In September 2013, the incarceration rate of the United States of America was the highest in the world, at 716 per 100,000 of the national population. While the United States represents about 4.4 percent of the world's population, it houses around 22 percent of the world's prisoners. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_incarceration_ra...
It is not mass-incarcerating people arbitrarily for their membership of a peaceful religion, and then harvesting their organs.
Again, I reject your false equivalence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If "dumping documents" doesn't qualify as a journalist, should the New York Times return it's Pulitzer for the Pentagon Papers? [1] 1: https://www.pulitzer.org/article/race-publish-pentagon-paper... 2: https://www.nytimes.com/1972/05/02/archives/the-times-wins-a...
No, because they read these papers and wrote the story on them. Wikileaks just provided mostly unprocessed data dumps. Explaining the story is a very big part of a journalist's job.
[1] https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/05/the-good-fight-...
[2] https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/cbs-censors-t...
I feel like free speech has never been under such attack. Culturally, we don't care about it, we find offensive content more offensive than censorship of offensive content. Politically, they can censor you completely if they want to by hitting you with an NSL. EFF says that happens 60 times a day. The most hard hitting journalist in the west, Julian Assange, was just put in jail. I'm scared about the future. It's not…
Vanity Fair says the show runners threatened to quit. They got CBS to put “CBS HAS CENSORED THIS CONTENT" on screen for 8.5 seconds.[1][2] [1] https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/05/the-good-fight-... [2] https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/cbs-censors-t...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the US I seem to be able to find people saying virtually anything. Certain privately owned and operated platforms have kicked off certain voices (as is their right if you believe in property rights), but they've just moved to other platforms that are easy to find. Assange is being charged with a crime, not speech. He deserves a fair trial of course, but what got him in trouble is not merely speaking. I can't think…
Daniel Ellsberg was charged with a crime, not speech too. He only got off because the Nixon administration bungled things so bad that he got a mistrial.
I'll let you go look because it speaks volumes about the politics at work and who is afraid of what information Assange is holding.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Native ads are what print newspapers have, and they don't require logins. They'd just charge Chevrolet $50,000 to run a skyscraper on sports articles for a week or whatever.
Print newspapers don't require logins because you can't read a print paper unless you already purchased it. To replicate that online, a login is necessary. I was under the impression the New York Times didn't allow companies to pay for custom articles until recently, but I could be wrong. Do you know when this happened?
China has basically made it known they will go after a company's employees. I'm sure that CBS is very concerned about general access to the Chinese market and don't want their shows banned for purely economic reasons, but the subtle threat of their Chinese employees disappearing because of a cartoon is a real thing.
Let's say this was my decision, pretend I'm a director or VP at CBS and I need to make the call about this cartoon, and whether the threat against my subordinates in country - or myself on my next business trip - is real. After Fan Bingbing's disappearance last year, I would take this very seriously and I'm not sure I would make a different call.
That's censorship, full stop.
I'm not sure what CBS alone can do about this - they're a single company against a sovereign nation. Not to let them off the hook, but I really feel the U.S. government has to step up here.