moviefreakedmind

Mrebo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

Jay said:

Once access to a private platform becomes a requirement for visibility and success, does the platform have an obligation that goes beyond its own financial interests?

I believe so. I actually think the government needs to enforce the 1st Amendment on all of these monopolistic speech platforms. A lot of people are, rightfully so, fearful of the government censoring them, but then turn a blind eye to corporations being their overlord. I want neither. It’s why the presidents of the progressive era, Teddy Roosevelt mainly and Taft to a degree, broke up all those trusts and monopolies that were making life intolerable for most Americans. Wilson even nationalized the railroads. Conservatives struggle a lot with this argument because they simultaneously want to proclaim that they’re somehow victims of censorship when their worldview allows for the corporate overlords to censor them.

Also, to be clear I was talking about the people that want to censor the game or have it removed but they don’t care about gun control.

The government cannot and should not enforce the 1st Amendment on private parties. That itself would be a violation of the 1st Amendment. It would be no different than forcing book publishers to print books they’re opposed to. The publishers themselves have a freedom of expression that encompasses the works they publish and choose not to publish.

I agree with your book publisher example, but imagine if there was only one book publisher with any kind of audience. That’s essentially what Youtube is, or Facebook. And book publishing is totally different. That actually requires printing copies and advertising. Youtube and Facebook and Twitter are just platforms.

I recognize the tension between the competing values and come out in favor of free speech. That doesn’t mean a law. Certainly not one that does greater damage to free speech than it addresses.

Enforcing the 1st amendment on integral media platforms doesn’t do greater damage to free speech than it addresses. Youtube, to use that example, is a monolith that is the only real video platform available to people.

Jay said:

Once access to a private platform becomes a requirement for visibility and success, does the platform have an obligation that goes beyond its own financial interests?

I believe so. I actually think the government needs to enforce the 1st Amendment on all of these monopolistic speech platforms. A lot of people are, rightfully so, fearful of the government censoring them, but then turn a blind eye to corporations being their overlord. I want neither. It’s why the presidents of the progressive era, Teddy Roosevelt mainly and Taft to a degree, broke up all those trusts and monopolies that were making life intolerable for most Americans. Wilson even nationalized the railroads. Conservatives struggle a lot with this argument because they simultaneously want to proclaim that they’re somehow victims of censorship when their worldview allows for the corporate overlords to censor them.

Also, to be clear I was talking about the people that want to censor the game or have it removed but they don’t care about gun control.

Jeebus said:

Cops bring suicidal man to get help, then beat the crap out of him, FBI says

There are so many stories of cops beating the shit out of or murdering suicide threats. I’m sure all the “good” cops out there will be quick to come and defend these violent thugs with badges.

It’s just an easy target for people to virtue-signal, not unlike how standing for the national anthem at a sporting even is just a way for lazy people to pretend to be good citizens.

If you care about this video game, but don’t care about gun control, then you’re not interested in actually addressing what is causing these shootings.

SilverWook said:

Most box office talk is just click bait fodder. They built SW up now they want to tear it down. The movie will be fine and Star Wars will be fine. Anybody who stayed home because they hated TLJ, thank you! As I went at the last minute on Thursday night, I got a nice seat. 😉

When movies cost 500 million dollars to make and market, an 84 million dollar domestic take on opening weekend is very concerning, especially when it’s the movie based on the most likable character in all of Star Wars.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/30/us/valve-removes-active-shooter-game-trnd/index.html?utm_source=fbCNN&utm_content=2018-05-30T18%3A29%3A04&utm_term=link&utm_medium=social

Anyone who cares about this video game but does not care about the lack of effective gun control in this country doesn’t actually give a damn about the lives of the students in these school shootings.

SilverWook said:

You guys know Reagan called Russia the evil empire, right? Politicians invoking Star Wars has been around as long as the movie.

I was thinking of a different Reagan era Star Wars thing.

The first season was great, the second season not so much, although there are some good aspects. Ironically, the biggest problem with season 2, in my opinion, is that they started injecting a ton of what I call “damage control.” Basically that means it’s full of moralizing and insulting attempts at convincing miserable people that there’s hope when there is none and help where there also is none.

One last statement on Roseanne. I find it annoying that this is also just another chance for lazy rich people to pretend they care about world issues. As someone pointed out, no one cares about the Puerto Rico hurricane, no one cares about any real issues, but they can all turn on Roseanne, who they loved two days ago even though she’s been saying this shit on Twitter for years, and pretend to be virtuous. It’s obvious to me and it really should be obvious to everyone else that Roseanne is completely insane to the point of probably not even being capable of coherent thought. It’s already been years since she was capable of coherent conversation and she suffered severe brain damage as a teenager, which I found out today from the only real nuanced coverage of this, which came from the Young Turks.

It’s a really unfair barometer. I don’t remember the score for Alien off the top of my head but I’d never just assume that it’s bad because I don’t remember it. I could say the same about most of the movies I’ve seen, honestly.

I’m not going to say that things get better because that’s a lie, sometimes they get worse, but to live life based on the affection of one single person isn’t rational so I’d recommend not depending on her even if it actually is true that she’s the only vessel of happiness in your life.

People come and go in life.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/05/29/florida-police-violent-facebook-comment-parkland-david-hogg/650504002/

Another example to add to the ongoing “cops suck” list.

DominicCobb said:

Again I haven’t watched the show, but what I’ve read doesn’t really speak to “making light,” moreso it’s glorifying and not detering.

It doesn’t deter anything, and I don’t think that’s its job, but it doesn’t fail at deterring suicide any more than the absolutely sickening shit that most people claim is supposed to deter suicide. I’m talking about the ignorant “It gets better” and “You’ve got so much to live for” bullshit that gets thrown around by people that typically have no idea what they’re talking about.

I don’t think it’s up to the media to deter people from doing anything.

DominicCobb said:

moviefreakedmind said:

DominicCobb said:

Mrebo said:

Jeebus said:

Mrebo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

As for mrebo, no one is cutting off the right, they’re bigger than ever on Youtube and just want to play the victim like they always do.

Yes, people on the right are being cut off. It’s not “playing victim” when powerful media corporations shut out people based on their political views.

Except that’s not what’s happening, at least in Youtube’s case. Youtube is demonetizing a great many people, not all of them are conservative or even political commentators at all. Left-wing commentators, gun channels, “reaction” channels, gaming channels, it’s happening across the board.

I have a problem with youtube’s demonetizing in general. I am more familiar with people on the right being targeted (and I’d include gun channels in that), but I am also aware of youtube discriminating against reaction & gaming channels for swearing (or extreme antics). But I’m not just talking youtube.

. . . and making light of suicide (including footage of a dead body).

People make light of suicide every day, and that includes the ignorant people behind a lot of the anti-suicide campaigns, which are usually really insulting and obviously come from people privileged enough to not want to kill themselves. Footage of a dead body is the farthest thing in the world from “making light of suicide.” Logan Paul is a piece of shit by the way, I don’t deny that, but he’s a piece of shit for monetizing an issue he obviously doesn’t care about, not for showing a dead body. 13 Reasons Why is another thing that people claimed made light of suicide when it obviously didn’t.

How was what he did not making light of suicide? The whole video was about “lulz people kill themselves in this forest.”

I didn’t see the video because I don’t watch Logan Paul - because I don’t suck 😉 - but like I implied and should’ve made clear, the whole cavalier attitude and motivation behind the video was what made light of suicide, not the footage of the body itself, which is what people latched onto.

I can’t comment on 13 Reasons Why because I didn’t watch it but I read from people who actually had suicidal tendencies who weren’t fans so maybe I’d say they’re better authorities than you (not to say their opinion is objectively correct, just that yours definitely isn’t even though you present it as “obvious”).

I’ve tried to kill myself many times and recently realized that I’ve had suicidal ideation for over 50% of my life so I’d say I’m a better authority than most. Showing someone writhing in pain as they bleed to death “obviously” (and I think that’s a fair use of the word) doesn’t glorify suicide or make light of it. Maybe it doesn’t deter it. That’s a fair conversation to have and I don’t think 13 Reasons Why does deter it at all, but to say that it makes light of suicide is not fair.

There’s an argument to be made too that Youtube is a private company and can decide who makes money on their site or not as they please.

That’s an argument that only works against conservative voices in the debate. I don’t believe that giant platforms like Youtube should dictate who can and can’t speak on them. They’re too integral to society these days. As for advertisers, that’s a different story, but in terms of who can and can’t speak, I think it should basically operate how the 1st amendment does.

Is Youtube banning accounts? Honest question. In my mind demonetizing and banning aren’t the same thing. Demonetizing is essentially what you’re talking about: advertisers.

They’ve banned some for very dubious reasons, mostly ones that I don’t care about but not any that are illegal. I don’t have a problem with them banning violent content, like ISIS or people calling for genocide and inciting violence. Like I said, I think it should be handled like the 1st Amendment.

DominicCobb said:

moviefreakedmind said:

DominicCobb said:

moviefreakedmind said:

DominicCobb said:

Roseanne is straight up racist.

I don’t know. She said something racist. I don’t know if that makes her racist.

Of course it does.

I disagree. Plenty of people say stupid things they don’t mean. I’m sure you’ve said something racist before. I have. We’re not racist. Even if she is, her work isn’t and is the opposite of racist, so why does it matter? I care so much more about actions than words, especially when dealing with crazy people. I use the same line of reasoning when people claim to be liberals but do nothing but make excuses for the right and platform almost exclusively right-wing people, like Dave Rubin typically does. In that case, actions speak louder to me than words do.

When someone consistently makes racist statements, seems kinda weird to not call them racist.

As to why to fire her for her hate speech? As an extreme example, do you think ABC would want a show on air lead by David Duke?

David Duke is worse and has no talent.

Jeebus said:

Mrebo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

As for mrebo, no one is cutting off the right, they’re bigger than ever on Youtube and just want to play the victim like they always do.

Yes, people on the right are being cut off. It’s not “playing victim” when powerful media corporations shut out people based on their political views.

The right isn’t being cut off any more than the left is being cut off. Youtube is demonetizing a great many people, left-wing commentators, gun channels, “reaction” channels, gaming channels, it’s happening across the board.

Yeah, they’re demonetizing everyone. The right is just pretending to be the only ones. I know of many left-wing channels, some are my favorite on Youtube, that are being demonetized on 100% of their videos.

Jay said:

moviefreakedmind said:

DominicCobb said:

Roseanne is straight up racist.

I don’t know. She said something racist. I don’t know if that makes her racist. She actually had an episode about unconscious racism where she called out white people for unwittingly judging black people. Like I said in that list, you’d have to get rid of Elvis Costello, Lou Reed, and a ton of others if you judge people by one stupid statement.

I watched the reboot and the Yemeni/Muslim neighbor episode was the best one in my opinion. Anyone who called it racist or Islamophobic completely missed the point. And never mind that there are regular cast members on the show who are black, so calling Roseanne racist or the show racist implies that these cast members don’t know enough to make their own decisions about who they work with, which is condescending.

One of the reasons for the show’s popularity is that it represents how American families not drowning in PC culture actually talk in their private lives. Lots of people have weird ideas about other people, but that doesn’t mean they’re malicious in their intent or full-on racist.

However, everyone should know by now that comparing people with dark skin to apes has racist connotations (which is why it’s silly that some on the right are calling out Bill Maher for comparing Trump to an orangutan…it’s not the same thing). You just don’t do it.

Totally agree. Bill Maher by the way is another person who’s made reprehensible statements, his condoning statutory rape. I don’t want his work shut down for such bullshit either. I’m pretty consistent on this.

DominicCobb said:

Mrebo said:

Jeebus said:

Mrebo said:

moviefreakedmind said:

As for mrebo, no one is cutting off the right, they’re bigger than ever on Youtube and just want to play the victim like they always do.

Yes, people on the right are being cut off. It’s not “playing victim” when powerful media corporations shut out people based on their political views.

Except that’s not what’s happening, at least in Youtube’s case. Youtube is demonetizing a great many people, not all of them are conservative or even political commentators at all. Left-wing commentators, gun channels, “reaction” channels, gaming channels, it’s happening across the board.

I have a problem with youtube’s demonetizing in general. I am more familiar with people on the right being targeted (and I’d include gun channels in that), but I am also aware of youtube discriminating against reaction & gaming channels for swearing (or extreme antics). But I’m not just talking youtube.

. . . and making light of suicide (including footage of a dead body).

People make light of suicide every day, and that includes the ignorant people behind a lot of the anti-suicide campaigns, which are usually really insulting and obviously come from people privileged enough to not want to kill themselves. Footage of a dead body is the farthest thing in the world from “making light of suicide.” Logan Paul is a piece of shit by the way, I don’t deny that, but he’s a piece of shit for monetizing an issue he obviously doesn’t care about, not for showing a dead body. 13 Reasons Why is another thing that people claimed made light of suicide when it obviously didn’t.

There’s an argument to be made too that Youtube is a private company and can decide who makes money on their site or not as they please.

That’s an argument that only works against conservative voices in the debate. I don’t believe that giant platforms like Youtube should dictate who can and can’t speak on them. They’re too integral to society these days. As for advertisers, that’s a different story, but in terms of who can and can’t speak, I think it should basically operate how the 1st amendment does.

DominicCobb said:

moviefreakedmind said:

DominicCobb said:

Roseanne is straight up racist.

I don’t know. She said something racist. I don’t know if that makes her racist.

Of course it does.

I disagree. Plenty of people say stupid things they don’t mean. I’m sure you’ve said something racist before. I have. We’re not racist. Even if she is, her work isn’t and is the opposite of racist, so why does it matter? I care so much more about actions than words, especially when dealing with crazy people. I use the same line of reasoning when people claim to be liberals but do nothing but make excuses for the right and platform almost exclusively right-wing people, like Dave Rubin typically does. In that case, actions speak louder to me than words do.

She actually had an episode about unconscious racism where she called out white people for unwittingly judging black people.

That doesn’t make her not racist (she isn’t even a writer on the recent season).

It definitely means that her big contributions to society aren’t racist.

DominicCobb said:

Roseanne’s been a fucking loon for a long time:
https://www.vox.com/2018/5/29/17406014/roseanne-racism-abc-trump-twitter

No one claims that she isn’t. She’s totally crazy and has been for at least a decade. ABC knew that full well, I’m sure.

SilverWook said:

Roseanne has more than one stupid statement.

So has everyone else.

chyron8472 said:

I just think, that with the exponentially increasing ability for stupid people to say stupid things in a louder voice atop a higher soapbox, it is unwise to assume that they are all just words and have no impact on others. I don’t want these people to have an audience. All they do is add further decay to the culture. You guys might say (and have said) that just because I don’t like something, that doesn’t mean it should be censored for all. Okay, granted that. But I don’t think just because we have freedom of speech, that inherently gives such speech any value.

It doesn’t inherently give any speech value. 99% of what people have to say is already devoid of any value. No one is saying Roseanne’s tweet is valuable. As for our culture, it’s already decayed. Our culture is dogshit. It’s full of stupid and ignorant people that are convinced they’re smart when they’re not and it’s full of dogshit shows and dogshit movies and dogshit “music” and dogshit everything else. Most commentary from all sides is insipid trash. No one ever wants to do or say anything exciting. Culture is decayed. It’s beyond decay and it always has been. I hate cultures. I’m so sick of people talking about culture and how important it is or how it’s in danger or it’s decaying. It sucks and it always has.

I’m just tired of people of influence having a whole field of f*cks to give that is perpetually barren regarding how they negatively impact those who respect and listen to them.

I don’t really care how people are affected by tweets that barely anyone saw or cared about until it got blown up in the media.

Sure Cosby’s actions are unquestionably vile. But to say that people who say the things that (for example) Alex Jones says are lesser crimes because they are not physically destructive nor overtly psychologically destructive—to say that, overlooks how powerful words can be when they come from the mouths of the right people.

They are lesser crimes because they aren’t raping people. (I’m really tired of people pretending that words = actions. People did the same in response to Kathy Griffin.) Alex Jones is a criminal for all of his libel and slander and selling false-hope drugs. He’s also destructive because he makes his living off of lying. And he has no talent.

So no, I do not give talented people a pass for being shit just because they contribute something to the arts.

I don’t “give them a pass.” I just don’t want to sacrifice the things they make that I like because they said something stupid.

DominicCobb said:

Roseanne is straight up racist.

I don’t know. She said something racist. I don’t know if that makes her racist. She actually had an episode about unconscious racism where she called out white people for unwittingly judging black people. Like I said in that list, you’d have to get rid of Elvis Costello, Lou Reed, and a ton of others if you judge people by one stupid statement.

I kind of agree with Mrebo. Like I said about Crowder, and I consider him an extreme example in the sense that I don’t think he has ever contributed anything valuable to anything regarding either media or humanity. I wouldn’t shed a single tear if his face melted off his head live on camera like in Raiders of the Lost Ark, but I don’t want Youtube to bar him from making content, not because I care about his content (I wouldn’t miss it) but the precedent affects others. And I might care about some of those others.

Kathy Griffin is one that conservatives wanted to basically be erased from American society. I think she’s the least funny person alive, possibly, but I don’t want her to be shut down because she’s too offensive.