Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

tarahenley.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 441 posts

Re: Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

#241

Post by john_moscow »

space_fountain wrote: post #206
tristan957 wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am a man. My pronouns on my LinkedIn profile do nothing other than to appease a fringe part of society who thinks being incorrectly referred to by a different pronoun is an attack on their character. I don't feel the need to give in to these people. Someone who would repeatedly refer to you by the wrong pronouns doesn't care that your pronouns are on your profile. It is a solution looking for a problem.

Well sometimes it can be tough to know. Is that a trans man showing a bit an effeminate side sometimes or a woman? Is that person trying to look androgynous or masculine or is it just what they like to wear?

Well, if it really bothers someone when someone else uses the wrong pronoun, they could always just politely ask. Just like people with hard-to-pronounce foreign names. And if someone else refuses, you know, just don't be friends with that guy - be professional, to-the-point and spend your free time with the people that share your values.

If you actually have a great home, friends, hobbies, and are generally happy about your life, someone using the wrong pronoun or giving you a weird look shouldn't bother you more than an unexpected rainy day. The problem is that most people that are vocal about pronouns are actually deeply unhappy, and the HR has sold them the bullshit pill that devoting your life to correcting others will somehow make you happier.

Or you could agree to disagree on pronouns, and agree to agree on pursuit of financial independence like in the good old times. Easy common goal. After all, you don't care if your colleague likes heavy metal while you love rock, as long as they can reliably answer questions that would otherwise take you days to research.

Re: Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

#242

Post by erk__ »

kazinator wrote: post #81

The CBC got a $1.2B in government funding in 2019-2020: Source: themselves: https://cbc.radio-canada.ca/en/impact-and-accountability/fin... Can you believe it? Yet, these money-grabbing robber barons don't provide Canadians with streaming. There is a shitty CBC app compatible with Android TV which serves some canned videos and pictures, and a CBC News app for phones that has live news (that will Chromecast). I say cu…

That a broadcaster with approximately twice the government funding is delivering a better service is not a great argument to cut funding, you could even say that it is the opposite.

CBC get $31,807,419 CAD per million capita from the government.[0]

NHK get $61.293.417 CAD per million capita from license fees.[1]

CBC may be awful compared to NHK, but your argument loses power when you have not looked up information like this.

Danish Radio gets $114.787.353 CAD per million capita from the government which is more than both the above, and they also have a great collection of shows and movies available to stream. [2]

[0]: Your link

[1]: https://www.nhk.or.jp/corporateinfo/english/publication/asse...

[2]: https://www.ft.dk/samling/20201/almdel/KUU/bilag/103/2332285...

Re: Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

#243

Post by inglor_cz »

lazyasciiart wrote: post #230
inglor_cz wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On social stuff, California is well left of Europe including Scandinavia. What you say could apply in Arkansas. For example, Danish or Norwegian immigration rules would be a perfect fit for any R president, perhaps even too strict.

This is reductive to the point of being incorrect. "Social stuff" includes things like maternity leave, childcare, healthcare, incarceration and drug policies. California is proud that they ended sentences of life-without-parole for children in 2017 - and replaced it with life-with-possible-parole-after-25-years, which remains far worse than Denmark permits even for the worst adult crime (life with possible parole af…

Fine, I meant "woke stuff" that excites Twitter so much and makes so many non-Twitterati confused and perplexed.

What you mention used to be a typical left-wing agenda, but is increasingly being utterly forgotten by the younger generations of left-wing politicians.

Re: Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

#244

Post by olivermarks »

deltarholamda wrote: post #222
olivermarks wrote: post #163

Strange thread here ignoring the very important points about the media Tara is making. 'Those of us on the inside know just how swiftly — and how dramatically — the politics of the public broadcaster have shifted. It used to be that I was the one furthest to the left in any newsroom, occasionally causing strain in story meetings with my views on issues like the housing crisis. I am now easily the most conservative, f…

>Neilsen demonstrates that the legacy media are dying fast, fewer and fewer people are tuned in as the broadcasting becomes more and more toxic. This is a good thing imo. But is it a good thing? A free press can be thought of as the sensory organs of the polity. If the sensory organs are faulty, or worse are deliberately lying, then alternative sensory organs may fill in the blanks with less robust information. These…

By 'free press' here I think you mean state sponsored and/or corporate 'news' outlets. The internet has transcended these last century print and broadcast foundationed constructs long ago, but their owners prop up their mastheads as though they are still the top tier of 'fact checked' integrity, despite the fact they are now in some cases sloppier than the Drudge Report ever was.

Tara presumably left a salaried job where her job description changed. Good for her, now the challenge is building credibility on the censorship dominated internet and staying on the right side of the big tech editorial platform gatekeepers....CDA230 where are you?

Re: Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

#245

Post by badRNG »

mananaysiempre wrote: post #194
badRNG wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a chicken or egg problem with the "coven of witches" conjecture. I also don't think Gab is all that marginal. It seems to exist largely to facilitate conversations around perceived excesses with diversity efforts. My greater point is that communities that facilitate these types of conversations typically have less inviting, more hostile cultures. There's a spectrum of course, but you can see glimmers of the t…

Cf. Scott Alexander’s “three principled civil libertarians and seven zillion witches” quip[1]. This bootstrap problem has very little to do with current affairs anywhere, I’d say, and I don’t think it has ever been solved except where the more liberal (in the original sense) means of communication additionally had some sort of technical superiority as well. Except maybe the founding story of the US—I’m not an expert—…

No post body was provided.

Re: Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

#246

Post by boppo1 »

snarf21 wrote: post #140
badRNG wrote: post #22

I'm not sure these sorts of articles provide much value on HN. By "these sorts of articles", I mean the ones that have claimed that "diversity efforts have gone too far this time ." Regardless of your support or opposition to diversity, I think one would agree that these rapidly turn into unproductive, highly divisive comment sections that are out of place with the rest of HN.

One thing I learned in my many years in this life: you can't fix inequity by inching slowly in the "right" direction. However, the "right" stopping point is too often controlled by the same oppressors. You have to be like a pendulum and swing waaayyy too far past "equity". Then the pendulum will eventually energy out at a more reasonable equitable point. This is a lot of anchoring point bias built in. This overcomes…

I think 'equity' is such an unfortunate choice of term. This usage popped up in the mainstream and then exploded all over in the last couple of years. I'm sure it was chosen for its phonetic adjacency to 'equality'. I haven't seen and concrete definitions for the usage, just borderline-meme webcomic illustrations of people looking over a fence at a baseball game. I believe understand the meaning, that being that equality before the law does not account for material quality of life imbalances arising from unquestionable historical wrongdoing. It seems to be most frequently used in describing the relationship of Black and Indigenous Americans to Americans of European "white" descent.

My big issue with it is that the word 'equity' has an extremely important financial meaning that many of the people wielding the new usage are unfamiliar with or don't know at all. There are lots of young people who don't have 'nu-equity' and are woefully ignorant of the overwhelming influence the accounting equation and cash flow valuation has on their lives. Teaching this new vague definition of 'equity' is going to divorce so many people from ever having productive conversations about wealth. Already, lots of people I follow in finance (white and nonwhite, male and female, immigrants and natural born) are dismissing this kind of language out-of-hand.

Or, perhaps I am wrong. Maybe this new usage of equity points, in fact, to exactly the same thing as the legacy financial definition. The activists want shares and they demand them now. I have not seen anything to support this identity, but maybe the meaning isn't too far off.

Re: Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

#247

Post by 908B64B197 »

NikolaeVarius wrote: post #41
beebmam wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a strict egalitarian and have been doing exactly this, and always encourage others to do exactly this. I refuse to state my gender, race, class, health status, sexuality, or any other qualifier that could categorize me into being discriminated against or in favor of. Let my actions speak to the quality of my character. edit: Not sure why this thread has gone deep into a discussion about pronouns. I don't identify…

At a previous job HR directly contacted me and told me to put my pronouns on my profile. I said sure and proceeded to ignore it. Fuck that shit

I don't hate the idea of explicitly stating pronouns, especially online, because I had to interact with people with particularly ambiguous names (happens often in very international environments).

Even here in America, if you get an email from "Taylor Something" and their intranet picture is a houseplant how do you respond?

Re: Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

#249

Post by Wiseacre »

david38 wrote: post #130
CapitalistCartr wrote: post #30

Except at political groups to which I belong, I am almost always the left-most person in the room. The Lefts greatest weakness is an enthusiasm for splintering over small matters of doctrine. Identity politics, tribalism over principle, virtue signaling, whatever fad this is, it's deeply hurting progress.

Broadly speaking, the left likes to go come up with new ways of doing things, the right likes to implement the "tried and true". Almost by definition, this means the left is always trying many things (always need the next new thing) and the right is consolidating on what they perceive to be the best of the tried and true.

That doesn't match up with reality. Take climate change for example. The left was fine with coal until it became proven that it is a major accelerant to climate change. It isn't change for the sake of change. In a similar vein, the right may choose an action because it is convenient, not necessarily because it is tried and true. Not only does what you say not follow, it describes nothing by definition.

That being said it isn't a good look to simplify these perspectives as "the left" and "the right" as people do not really act within the confines of those labels.

Re: Speaking Freely: Why I resigned from the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation

#250

Post by inglor_cz »

hk__2 wrote: post #218
inglor_cz wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"To me it seems logical that a young black woman who sees a black female CEO interviewed on TV is more likely to become a CEO herself. " Beware logic in this case. A lot of claims in social sciences seem logical, but either aren't proven at all or the alleged proof fails to replicate. A similar logic was used to argue for banning violent video games or porn.

This is a strawman argument. That some claims aren’t proven or that some similar logic was used to do another bad thing doesn’t mean OP is wrong. What OP is referring to is largely documented and is not some small claim from a random article.

[citations needed]

Lots of previously believed claims fail to replicate. One of those is "stereotype threat", which was basically taken for granted for decades and also looks logically plausible.

https://replicationindex.com/2017/04/07/hidden-figures-repli...

Post reply on HN