finite_jest
Joined 5 years ago
Karma
1,292
Submissions
285
Member since
Sep 20
Recent submissions
Comment · 4 years ago
That is extremely unlikely to be true. The guests don't own the copyright, so they can't leverage that. Also, some of the guests are protesting this on Twitter.
Comment · 4 years ago
> Predictably, people break out the C-word.
Censorship is now a taboo word? That's pretty ironic.
Comment · 4 years ago
I'm sure the motivation of many book burners of the past was also to save the would-be readers from eternal hell. Possible good motivations don't justify censorship.
You could argue that in this particular case censorship probably won't even be effective. Rogan is seen as a something of a censorship martyr by quite a few people now, Streisand effect and all.
Also, there's the fact that most of the removed episodes have nothing to do with Covid-19.
Comment · 4 years ago
I don't think that's a good framing of the issue. Otherwise, why is merely making the "cancellers" face the "consequences" of their actions bad?
Comment · 4 years ago
No, it's not representative of how free speech would look like. "The coven of the witches" problem arises in part because of all the witch-hunting going on.
Comment · 4 years ago
> Forgive me but what are you protesting exactly?
Corporate censorship. [1]
> At some point you have to look in the mirror.
I don't appreciate your personal attack. You are not arguing in good faith, and I'm done responding to you.
Comment · 4 years ago
> They can do whatever the fuck they want.
If that's your framing, you should also grant that we can also protest whatever the fuck we want. This is a trite and unfruitful line of argument.
Comment · 4 years ago
> every periodical does. I’m not sure what the point of complaining about that is.
That is broadly correct, though not all of them are equally biased. However, journalistic objectivity [1] is something we could demand them to strive for. I'm not sure if the press have always been like this.
> Likewise, it’s not particularly noteworthy that WSJ and Fox News have a conservative bias.
Most of the US mainstream outlets are biased in a particular direction. I've said the before here, but you can see that by taking any reasonable list of major outlets [1], and checking their biases [2][3].
> If we are to get up in arms about something, it should be because they are being deceptive (or worse, publishing false information), not because they are merely biased.
Paltering is also a form of deception, and you could argue that it is quite pervasive and pernicious. I think Mother Jones, and many other outlets, are guilty of that.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Journalistic_objectivity
[2]: e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_media_in_the_United_State...
Comment · 4 years ago
I don't think that's the reason. Hanlon's razor is just a heuristic, we shouldn't blindly and naively apply it to everything. I think you can see how biased Mother Jones is by taking the headlines on their front page, and trying to rewrite them as someone attempting to be impartial would.
Comment · 4 years ago
I think that is is an excellent and relevant example of press bias, which @legerdemain was commenting on.
Generic straw mans are not conducive to good faith arguments, HN or elsewhere.
Comment · 4 years ago
> I have seen this disingenuous copy-paste objection show up in every thread on this topic on HN
To be fair, your comment is objectively more generic and closer to a "copy-paste objection" than the GP's.
I have no idea how the press were in nineteen umpties, but it seems clear to me that the reporting by Mother Jones is pretty biased, and they have their fair share of polemic-level opinion pieces.
Do you think they would cover the recent removal of To Kill A Mockingbird (which is ironically a book they do mention in the article) from the curriculum by a Washington school board [1] in the same way? I don't think so. I searched their website, and it looks like they haven't covered it at all.
[1]: https://www.newsweek.com/schools-drop-kill-mockingbird-requi...
Comment · 4 years ago
We don't have a moral duty to make eighth-graders see depictions of everything that is heinous and ugly about the world.
Comment · 4 years ago
It has a "FIND GAME" option if you'd like to play with random people.
Comment · 4 years ago
I don't know, but Brendan Eich (Brave's CEO) [1] is pretty active on Twitter, and I think he used to answer the questions people asked. You could try asking him there. Let us know if you get an answer.
Also, I apologize for being a little bit too harsh in my previous comment.
〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰