Conservatives and right wingers promote violence while youtube does nothing

[LSD-Rumi]

Misinfomation and targeted speach and youtube and other social media platforms doing nothing. What a shame! this almost ended up in a disaster and the poor staff also report they are being harassed by angry people. 

 

Edited September 1, 2022 by LSD-Rumi

[Razard86]

No offense but they have been doing this for years. Ever heard of Rush Limbaugh? There is free speech and then there is straight up lies/misinformation and what I call terrorist propaganda. 

Domestic Terrorism has been the single most consistent and demonstrative terrorist threat on American soil and it has been promoted and directed by Fox News. There has been overwhelming news about this for YEARS. It was so bad Politicians have been shot over things said by Bill O'Reilly for example in the past. 

Pretty much every mass shooter has been a consistent viewer of Fox News and whenever you see their manifesto they mention Fox News in it. So you might ask why is this allowed? This is because their are white supremacist elements in high government positions. But all the evidence exists that proves that Fox News should have lost broadcasting privileges ages ago for gross misuse of their platform. 

[LSD-Rumi]

4 hours ago, Razard86 said:

No offense but they have been doing this for years. Ever heard of Rush Limbaugh? There is free speech and

I am still a freshman in the amazingly corrupt world of US politics 

I expect politics to involve corruption, hate and misinformation but in the US, it is at entirely other level.

Yeah Fox News is a mainstay in the spread of hate and misinformation yet it is a multi-billion business, who  is gonna stop that in a politically corrupt country? The focus now should be on youtube channels and social media platforms, where many right wing influncers could be banned for misinformation and hate speach.

Edited September 1, 2022 by LSD-Rumi

[Leo Gura]

Sad

[Blackness]

And who is the final provider, who decides what Truth is and what it is not, the one who decides on the border between information and misinformation?

Finely tuning what information can be made available to the masses, and what cannot, sounds very dystopian.

One of the few redeemable features of democracies is the freedom of speech and free sharing of views and ideas. If you get rid of that, why even bother calling it a democracy?

[Blackness]

Promoting violence is, and has been illegal for a long time. It's not the job of 'platforms' to stifle speech, it's the job of law enforcement - to enforce the law.

Nothing wrong with promoting hate. Sure, it is undesirable, but suppressing any base human emotion will backfire into something many, many times worse, as it always has.

The concept of hate speech is a degeneration of (post)modern society, and is merely a mind control attempt under the guise of virtue.

[Leo Gura]

16 minutes ago, Blackness said:

Nothing wrong with promoting hate

You are ignorant about how social dyamics work.

Free speech has never existed, nor should it ever exist. When you live with others you must moderate what you say.

Edited September 1, 2022 by Leo Gura

[LSD-Rumi]

@Blackness Dude you are out of touch with reality. If humanity used you ideals of free speach, we would be still hearing conservatives shouting ni$$ers on Fox News. 

Hate speach  is banned in any civil society except the US obviously 

[Tyler Robinson]

57 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

 

Free speech has never existed, nor should it ever exist. 

Free speech is a necessity in an ideal society. You don't want the voices of the weak to be muffled and never be heard. 

A clear demarcation is needed between free speech and offensive speech. 

It's offensive hate invoking speech that needs moderation and suspension. 

Free speech is the most important nexus of a democratic civil society. 

It's the foundation of human rights. 

 

[DocWatts]

On a related note, kudos to Biden for explicitly calling out and condemning  the calls to political violence from the Right in his speech last night.

Every one of us with a sense of social responsibility needs to be calling out dog whistle rhetoric that's advocating for political violence whenever we come across it, so as to deny those who are using it the plausible deniability they need for this sort of thing to become normalized.

[Danioover9000]

@DocWatts

3 hours ago, DocWatts said:

On a related note, kudos to Biden for explicitly calling out and condemning  the calls to political violence from the Right in his speech last night.

Every one of us with a sense of social responsibility needs to be calling out dog whistle rhetoric that's advocating for political violence whenever we come across it, so as to deny those who are using it the plausible deniability they need for this sort of thing to become normalized.

   I agree that we may need to call out the dog whistlers, provided we don't look like we snitched outright though.

    The trickier thing to call out, though, is when the defamation, slander, cursing and incitement of violence is a part of a work of art. For example, this is one of 5 songs of a diss track between Eminem and EVerlast. Have a listen:

   And it's blatantly obvious there's loads of incitement of violence, defamation and slander here, but should we call this out or not, morally speaking?

   And then it's off to the legal system if this is grounds for a lawsuit or charge, but that's dubious as this is a form of art right?

[DocWatts]

41 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

@DocWatts

   I agree that we may need to call out the dog whistlers, provided we don't look like we snitched outright though.

    The trickier thing to call out, though, is when the defamation, slander, cursing and incitement of violence is a part of a work of art. For example, this is one of 5 songs of a diss track between Eminem and EVerlast. Have a listen:

   And it's blatantly obvious there's loads of incitement of violence, defamation and slander here, but should we call this out or not, morally speaking?

   And then it's off to the legal system if this is grounds for a lawsuit or charge, but that's dubious as this is a form of art right?

Well, the context matters a lot here.

Eminem is adopting a fictional and exaggerated persona for comedic purposes, which can still be problematic, but isn't remotely the same thing as someone like Trump or Tucker Carlson pushing fascistic rhetoric that's intended to encourage acts of political violence (again, with a thin veneer of plausible deniability).

If you want to call the glamorization of violence in certain works artistic expression irresponsible I might agree with you, but it's an entirely different matter when the violent rhetoric is coming from a political party or former head of State.

Edited September 2, 2022 by DocWatts

[Danioover9000]

@DocWatts

49 minutes ago, DocWatts said:

Well, the context matters a lot here.

Eminem is adopting a fictional and exaggerated persona for comedic purposes, which can still be problematic, but isn't remotely the same thing as someone like Trump or Tucker Carlson pushing fascistic rhetoric that's intended to encourage acts of political violence (again, with a thin veneer of plausible deniability).

If you want to call the glamorization of violence in certain works artistic expression irresponsible I might agree with you, but it's an entirely different matter when the violent rhetoric is coming from a political party or former head of State.

   I agree context matters a ton. It makes all the difference really.

   Oh yes, I am saying sometimes the defamation, slander and inciting violence an artist can slip into their work covertly, or in Eminem's case overtly, is irresponsible. In the case for Eminem, this isn't his first diss track against an artist. Eminem is also more famous for not just how he raps, but how shocking and controversial he can be. He one time made a parody video of a number of celebrities, including Michael Jackson. In fact, he was having a vicious go at Michael, during the allegations of him being a pedophile. He was relentless in making fun of Michael, that Michael's fans were outraged, and it made him respond to Eminem. The irresponsible bit here, for me, is that he was riding the wave of the allegations against him, riding along the defamations stuff.

   What I'm trying to say is, if I was an artist, and I had to push the boundaries here, I could do a drawing or a painting of the Jan 06 almost Inserection and depict the white house getting rekt.  is this moral for me to do? I know context here really matters, but if I did this, is it moral, under the frameing of it being an art piece?

   Obviously in the political setting, policing the freedom of speech more is what I lean to especially if it's encouraging violent behavior.