531–540 of 1001 posts
I’m at a loss of what to watch as far as television goes in the US, between the government threatening to intervene in content, corporations that own television networks with little regard for journalistic integrity, and PBS downsizing. I’m pretty much exclusively watching NHK from Japan through a Roku app.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Confused politics isn’t all that unusual; look at Caitlyn Jenner for a concrete example. Add in the usual bad blood between well-armed groups and it certainly happens. I wish everyone would wait a week for actual reliable info to come out. I wish we weren’t getting a bunch of said info from deeply partisan and untrustworthy fuckwits. Neither end result would shock me.
According to the latest iteration, his right-wing family said he was left-wing and even neighbors saw him with his roommate. Freedom of speech is protected. That people are celebrating a man's death, and worse yet, justifying it, is evil but still protected. But what's not protected is the consequences of these actions. I don't want to live, work, etc... next to someone who thinks that it's ok to commit acts of viole…
But that still only includes a subset of views?
I mean what you are saying is right. But these people were perfectly fine with ignoring or sometimes outright endorsing political violence until one of their own was the target. That does not seem extremely hypocritical?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
ABC, who pays Kimmel, would be financially very, dis-served to have the FCC or IRS or any other big bit of government up their ass, even if it does ultimately come to nothing.
Maybe ABC could stand up for freedom of speech instead of caving to a wannabe dictator?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Noem is bragging that she shot the family hunting dog because he was "worthless"; all he would do is "massacre chickens" at her hunting lodge, and tried to bite her. She also put down a "disgusting, musky billy goat" that lived around her compound. She said wanted to come clean and show how she can "responsibility". She bragged that the story of shooting her dog got her the top slot at ICE." this is so chillingly re…
Have you ever lived in a rural community? Putting useless or malicious animals down is merciful and common place and definitely not the making of serial killers.
what many people call a useless dog, is actually the case of a useless person, with no skills at all regarding husbandry or behavior management.
gloating, feeling powerful as a result of causing death or discomfort, yes those actually are the making of serial killers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Call me old fashioned, but I do expect for things like this not to happen in an open, democratic society whose founding document explicitly declares free speech to be sacrosanct. Update: "things like this" is meant to refer to the act of suspending Kimmel's show in response to the specific, rather innocuous, comments he made in his monologue
Which "this" are you referring to, the shooting, the endorsement of it or the firing over the endorsement of it? All of them are bad but the ones on the left end of the sentence are more bad than the ones on the right. Edit: The endorsements and firings broadly speaking, not regards to anything specific to Kimmel or ABC
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I am largely neutral on this particular assassination, as I knew almost nothing about Mr. Kirk prior to his departure (just name recognition & basic political associations). This seems confusing to me. The default "neutral" position on any murder, most of all when you don't know much about the victim, is that murder is a horrible thing, is it not? Is that what you mean, or do you mean you aren't sure if this was go…
>Any human with their head screwed on straight innately assigns a very negative value weight to murder. Murderers walk freely among you, and we're not all bad people. A few good people earn their legal kills. A healthy society would encourage any speech which could reduce divisiveness (e.g. comments on Mr. Kirk, without retribution) — yet ours thrives on division, getting people to hate better with bigger hearts. ¢¢…
what? This is nuts. Are you saying you murder people?
> A healthy society would encourage any speech which could reduce divisiveness (e.g. comments on Mr. Kirk, without retribution)
Yes I agree with this. There are a lot of people that do vigils and prayers and eulogies when people die. Then there are people that go: he deserved it and XXX is next. The former does not drive division. The latter does - and that's what needs to stop.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them, and doing everything they can to score political points from it Kimmel did not assert Mr. Robinson was anything he wasn't. Kimmel noted how some people are doing everything possible to distance themselves from Mr. Robinson.
[flagged]
He can suggest whatever he wants.
Like the president suggests the extreme left is responsible for Kirk‘s murder.
No wait, the president didn’t suggest he claimed it as a fact.
Can’t wait for his cancellation.
I'm of two minds on this, I think all comedians should be able to make fun of anything, but at the same time, just because you have the right to free speech doesn't mean you get to avoid the consequences of what you say. Whether I agree with the outcome or not, if ABC don't like what Jimmy Kimmel said, they are free to pull his show off the air and fire him all they want, Kimmel is not entitled or owed TV time nor is…
It was the CEO of Disney and it happened after threats from the head of the FCC. Edit: to clarify, the CEO of Disney caved to pressure from affiliates owned by a Nexstar who are actively petitioning the FCC to relax media ownership rules so they can buy more affiliates than the law allows.
If that's not infringing on first amendment rights, I don't know what is. The right will of course support this; they tend to treat the constitution and laws as flexible whenever their ideology requires it.
Kimmel discussed the political response to Kirk's death, not the man, which is a class move that respects his family and the law. I can't see the problem. How many companies, media people and politicians need to bend the knee before someone stands up and says this has all gone far enough?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The right, has for the past decade or so taken a moral high ground with regards to cancelation. Have you been in a coma for that decade?
I first saw a moral panic over ‘cancel culture’ circa 2013 from The Atlantic and the opinion page of the New York Times . (The first because it’s demo is the naive liberal and pearl clutching parents of college students and the second because folks like Brooks and Blow don’t want to be canceled themselves). It was until 2017 or so that conservatives noticed the phenomenon and started to talk about it in The National…
I might be off my rocker on this, but!
>prove me wrong
Is such a right-wing to say.
Because it signals that a conservative believes that
*self-improvement is possible*.
Calling out cancel culture today: the youngest kid signals that they give up on self-improvement in favor of acting out, so the elder sibling, who used to be punished for a very similar thing, jumps (gleefully) on it . "Mama look at what she just did!" knowing the parents gonna wring their hands