This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Hate Speech
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 dreamwaverider  London 04 Sep 19 5.59am |
  |
|---|---|
|
Real venom in PM speech yesterday. Was that considered a hate speech?
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
tome  Inner Tantalus Time. 04 Sep 19 10.21am |
|
|---|---|
|
Might be of interest
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 04 Sep 19 10.35am |
 |
|---|---|
|
A frigging Guardian article? In the interests of free speech I resolved to read it. I could only make it to nearly half way.....Yuk....I imagined it carried on in much the same tone. That she has the freedom to write it is the only thing I can defend. Edited by Stirlingsays (04 Sep 2019 10.36am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
ASCPFC  Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 05 Sep 19 2.29pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
A frigging Guardian article? In the interests of free speech I resolved to read it. I could only make it to nearly half way.....Yuk....I imagined it carried on in much the same tone. That she has the freedom to write it is the only thing I can defend. Edited by Stirlingsays (04 Sep 2019 10.36am) I stopped reading at 'it's harder if not white and male'. Because that is not stereotyping is it.
Red and Blue Army! |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| tome Inner Tantalus Time. 06 Sep 19 12.24am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by ASCPFC
I stopped reading at 'it's harder if not white and male'. Because that is not stereotyping is it. Not really, she uses evidence to back up her claim. I think the point about there being 'more speech' is worth exploration. Seems to me that the internet has increased the number of people who broadcast their views, and the visibility of people's reactions. So whichever side of any debate going can always select the particularly moronic examples from the other side because there are more of them from which to choose. Perhaps the mods here can feel something of this...
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 06 Sep 19 3.18am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by tome
Not really, she uses evidence to back up her claim. I think the point about there being 'more speech' is worth exploration. Seems to me that the internet has increased the number of people who broadcast their views, and the visibility of people's reactions. So whichever side of any debate going can always select the particularly moronic examples from the other side because there are more of them from which to choose. Perhaps the mods here can feel something of this... 'Evidence'? What evidence is that? As for 'more speech'? What's that got to do with anything? There is probably a billion online in China...can they talk freely? What's the relevance of 'more speech'? No one has ever needed laws to protect inoffensive speech. Last year we had thousands of people contacted and warned by the Police in this country over Internet comments and many went to cases.....some of these may be justified due to incitement....however we have many examples that weren't. And of course we had the absurdity of the Nazi pug trial in Scotland that actually resulted in a conviction where a commentary was made that 'context doesn't matter'. However, the BBC...as we know, a publicly funded institution.... found that with Jo Brand's joke...and quite correctly I might add...context mattered. Edited by Stirlingsays (06 Sep 2019 3.23am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Invalid user 2019 07 Sep 19 10.57pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Chandrayaan-2: Modi proud despite Moon landing setback - [Link] That sucks. Close but no cigar.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 07 Sep 19 11.02pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by dollardays
Chandrayaan-2: Modi proud despite Moon landing setback - [Link] That sucks. Close but no cigar. Maybe pakistan hit it with a marsala.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Invalid user 2019 07 Sep 19 11.12pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Maybe pakistan hit it with a marsala. I'm pretty sure some of the bodily reactions to Masalas I've had have disrupted flights and radio signals, so it's a distinct possibility.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 07 Sep 19 11.14pm |
|
|---|---|
|
I've heard that there are already plans for Bollywood to make a movie about it...the lander landed but was just so stuck by the beauty of some Moon aliens that they just had to sign off and have a song and dance about it.....Things are going well but they are already having issues fitting the cows and elephants into the space suits.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Invalid user 2019 08 Sep 19 1.33am |
|
|---|---|
|
Yes very expensive to get a cow or elephant there. Maybe the Mormons will make a stab at it instead, as they would just need to get Magic Underwear on the surface of the moon.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| tome Inner Tantalus Time. 08 Sep 19 5.25am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
'Evidence'? What evidence is that? As for 'more speech'? What's that got to do with anything? There is probably a billion online in China...can they talk freely? What's the relevance of 'more speech'? No one has ever needed laws to protect inoffensive speech. Last year we had thousands of people contacted and warned by the Police in this country over Internet comments and many went to cases.....some of these may be justified due to incitement....however we have many examples that weren't. And of course we had the absurdity of the Nazi pug trial in Scotland that actually resulted in a conviction where a commentary was made that 'context doesn't matter'. However, the BBC...as we know, a publicly funded institution.... found that with Jo Brand's joke...and quite correctly I might add...context mattered.
If you'd read the article, you'd have seen - she cites Pew research on the people who are targeted by online abuse. I don't have a view on the evidence, but she did cite some. As for 'more speech', again it's something she touches on in the article. Worth exploring more, I figured. Eseentially my rumination is that the availability of moronic acts and commentary has increased. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the number of moronic acts and commentary has increased, just how available it is. That means it's become much easier for papers and other fora to write screeds about various idiotic acts because they are plastered all over social media. In the past, perhaps these were more easily ignored. Instead, because publications know that idiocy attracts controversy, which means more attention, advertising and so on. In turn, it would seem that people get angrier because idiocy is presented to them regularly. Also, many organisations whose idiots would have previously been ignored are not sure how to deal with the new attention, and so launch various crackdowns or similar which are usually ill-conceived. And lo the cycle continues. So perhaps all this stuff is not about free speech being under attach, but about people not handling new forms of attention well. Just a thought.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.