4 ms·

Customers want to know why Amazon removed Clarence Thomas documentary

43 points by blisseyGo 6y ago

unanswered 6y ago
It's obvious, isn't it? If you didn't vote for Biden, you ain't Black. It's fair to say Justice Thomas did not vote for Biden. It's perfectly consistent with this worldview to celebrate Black History Month by taking down a documentary about a conservative Black man in favor of lots of other documentaries about leftist white men, who are, after all, the chosen role models of the modern (leftist) Black man (according to themselves, not to me!). If you disagree with this point of view, don't downvote me; after all, I don't promote it! Instead question why it's the prevailing one in your bubble.
- cdolan 6y ago
  Deleted because the top comment just keeps editing their message to the point where it’s substantively different than when i posted just a few moments ago.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - dbuder 6y ago
    You have got to be kidding me. Not everyone publicly states who they voted for, esp if they are a supreme court justice. There are some things that don't need a source to be stated, just read his wikipedia, you don't even need to connect the dots.
  - unanswered 6y ago
    Unless I'm much mistaken comments on HN show whether they've been edited more than a few seconds after they're first posted. I believe I edited that comment to clarify something a few seconds after I posted it, in an effort to prevent people from taking my words out of context to incite rage and then blame me for that. But I'm sure whatever your comment was it was really well thought out in the short time you had available, and that it didn't do any of those things.
    - unanswered 6y ago
      Hmm... actually, come to think of it, what HN does is prevent editing a comment more than a few seconds after it's made. So... I suppose the theory is that I'm conspiring with the mods or something?
      - edbob 6y ago
        You're mistaken. I've edited comments a significant time after they were replied to. See the edit note on https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26187343 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26187343
- anm89 6y ago
  I see why this is inflammatory but >'If you have a problem figuring out whether you're for me or Trump, then you ain't black' is an actual Joe Biden quote and is reasonable to bring up. It has bearings on exposing the relationship between the democratic party and it's perceived relationship with people of color and the idea that there is an effort to censor people who don't adhere to this narrative which is the topic of this article.
  - randallsquared 6y ago
    "If you don't love the Eagles, then you ain't from Philly" could be meant as "If you don't love the Eagles, I will argue that you weren't born and raised in Philadelphia and shouldn't be allowed to claim you were". However, it's also possible to read it as "Virtually everyone I know who cares about sports and who lives in Philadelphia enthusiastically cheers the Eagles", and without the context of politics and the culture war, the first reading seems really weird. So, consider that Biden might have just said a hyperbolic thing in the moment without intending to imply that 5-10% of a voting demographic should be canceled.
    - anm89 6y ago
      Yes you could ignore what he actually said and try to construct a narrative that doesn't sound bad. But, isn't that a lot more complicated than just listening to what he actually said? To be more direct, myself and many other people aren't going to play that game. The only people that would are people who have a narrative in mind in advance and are going to find a way to justify it post hoc.
      - randallsquared 6y ago
        It is more complicated, but that's how communication works; most people do not mean anything close to the literal wording they use -- "Nobody goes there anymore, it’s too crowded". If you refuse to "play that game", then you get to be offended a lot more often, but you will also have to draw a distinction between how you understand communication from in-group and out-group, which seems to me to be even more complicated. :)
hirundo 6y ago
> If you're tired of cancel culture and censorship Yeah, I am, but it's a stretch to assume that's behind this, when it could easily be a licensing issue or something else benign. But I would be interested in an Amazon Streisand service that simply reports things that Amazon has disappeared, such as this and When Harry Became Sally. Maybe there is an ideological pattern, dunno. https://humanevents.com/2021/02/23/amazon-sneakily-removes-book-questioning-transgender-movement-from-platform/ https://humanevents.com/2021/02/23/amazon-sneakily-removes-b...
jeffgreco 6y ago
Classic conservative move: assign conspiracy to something as mundane as video streaming rights.
- refurb 6y ago
  Exactly. Conservative voices have never been suppressed ever before. Would be silly to assume they are now. /s
- AbrahamParangi 6y ago
  I think the assumption of editorial action or censorship is coming on the heels of amazon removing certain controversial books.
- emmelaich 6y ago
  Do you have more info on the streaming rights thing?
- autoditype 6y ago
  https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/02/amazon-kneels-before-the-mob/ https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/02/amazon-kneels-before-...
- david38 6y ago
  Funny, I see the left do that all the time as well
allears 6y ago
The fact that Breitbart is quoted as though it were some kind of objective source says that this is scarcely an unbiased site.
simpletruth90 6y ago
Solution to this whole feed. Go get the doc on Apple or YouTube and if you don’t like Amazon just stop using them, I did, and I now save $1000s per month. It’s a win win.
AvonDan 6y ago
Simple minded here. The fact that we don't know why Amazon pulled Clarence Thomas' documentary is problematic. Amazon seems too large to be pushed around against it's will. The continued speculation is understandable due to the lack of transparency. It would seem an honest company, presumably like Amazon, one of if not the largest company in the world, would have the courage of it's convictions and if they chose to pull it, to simply acknowledge the truth as to why. And if on the other hand there are extenuating circumstances why not state their are, even if for reasons of prudent corporate governance, they must not divulge those details. I, for one apparently lonely long time Prime supporter, would appreciate this level of transparency.
AvonDan 6y ago
Amazon and Amazon Prime have been very valuable recources to date. Perhaps, one of the reasons they have grown to such immense size. However, not to suggest I am enough alone able to influence them to speak up but better this tack than joining the undue or cancel crowd. Open mic is better.

43 points by blisseyGo 6y ago

It's obvious, isn't it? If you didn't vote for Biden, you ain't Black. It's fair to say Justice Thomas did not vote for Biden. It's perfectly consistent with this worldview to celebrate Black History Month by taking down a documentary about a conservative Black man in favor of lots of other documentaries about leftist white men, who are, after all, the chosen role models of the modern (leftist) Black man (according to themselves, not to me!). If you disagree with this point of view, don't downvote me; after all, I don't promote it! Instead question why it's the prevailing one in your bubble.

cdolan 6y ago
Deleted because the top comment just keeps editing their message to the point where it’s substantively different than when i posted just a few moments ago.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- dbuder 6y ago
  You have got to be kidding me. Not everyone publicly states who they voted for, esp if they are a supreme court justice. There are some things that don't need a source to be stated, just read his wikipedia, you don't even need to connect the dots.
- unanswered 6y ago
  Unless I'm much mistaken comments on HN show whether they've been edited more than a few seconds after they're first posted. I believe I edited that comment to clarify something a few seconds after I posted it, in an effort to prevent people from taking my words out of context to incite rage and then blame me for that. But I'm sure whatever your comment was it was really well thought out in the short time you had available, and that it didn't do any of those things.
  - unanswered 6y ago
    Hmm... actually, come to think of it, what HN does is prevent editing a comment more than a few seconds after it's made. So... I suppose the theory is that I'm conspiring with the mods or something?
    - edbob 6y ago
      You're mistaken. I've edited comments a significant time after they were replied to. See the edit note on https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26187343 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26187343
anm89 6y ago
I see why this is inflammatory but >'If you have a problem figuring out whether you're for me or Trump, then you ain't black' is an actual Joe Biden quote and is reasonable to bring up. It has bearings on exposing the relationship between the democratic party and it's perceived relationship with people of color and the idea that there is an effort to censor people who don't adhere to this narrative which is the topic of this article.
- randallsquared 6y ago
  "If you don't love the Eagles, then you ain't from Philly" could be meant as "If you don't love the Eagles, I will argue that you weren't born and raised in Philadelphia and shouldn't be allowed to claim you were". However, it's also possible to read it as "Virtually everyone I know who cares about sports and who lives in Philadelphia enthusiastically cheers the Eagles", and without the context of politics and the culture war, the first reading seems really weird. So, consider that Biden might have just said a hyperbolic thing in the moment without intending to imply that 5-10% of a voting demographic should be canceled.
  - anm89 6y ago
    Yes you could ignore what he actually said and try to construct a narrative that doesn't sound bad. But, isn't that a lot more complicated than just listening to what he actually said? To be more direct, myself and many other people aren't going to play that game. The only people that would are people who have a narrative in mind in advance and are going to find a way to justify it post hoc.
    - randallsquared 6y ago
      It is more complicated, but that's how communication works; most people do not mean anything close to the literal wording they use -- "Nobody goes there anymore, it’s too crowded". If you refuse to "play that game", then you get to be offended a lot more often, but you will also have to draw a distinction between how you understand communication from in-group and out-group, which seems to me to be even more complicated. :)

hirundo 6y ago

> If you're tired of cancel culture and censorship Yeah, I am, but it's a stretch to assume that's behind this, when it could easily be a licensing issue or something else benign. But I would be interested in an Amazon Streisand service that simply reports things that Amazon has disappeared, such as this and When Harry Became Sally. Maybe there is an ideological pattern, dunno. https://humanevents.com/2021/02/23/amazon-sneakily-removes-book-questioning-transgender-movement-from-platform/ https://humanevents.com/2021/02/23/amazon-sneakily-removes-b...

jeffgreco 6y ago

Classic conservative move: assign conspiracy to something as mundane as video streaming rights.

refurb 6y ago
Exactly. Conservative voices have never been suppressed ever before. Would be silly to assume they are now. /s
AbrahamParangi 6y ago
I think the assumption of editorial action or censorship is coming on the heels of amazon removing certain controversial books.
emmelaich 6y ago
Do you have more info on the streaming rights thing?
autoditype 6y ago
https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/02/amazon-kneels-before-the-mob/ https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/02/amazon-kneels-before-...
david38 6y ago
Funny, I see the left do that all the time as well

allears 6y ago

The fact that Breitbart is quoted as though it were some kind of objective source says that this is scarcely an unbiased site.

simpletruth90 6y ago

Solution to this whole feed. Go get the doc on Apple or YouTube and if you don’t like Amazon just stop using them, I did, and I now save $1000s per month. It’s a win win.

AvonDan 6y ago

Simple minded here. The fact that we don't know why Amazon pulled Clarence Thomas' documentary is problematic. Amazon seems too large to be pushed around against it's will. The continued speculation is understandable due to the lack of transparency. It would seem an honest company, presumably like Amazon, one of if not the largest company in the world, would have the courage of it's convictions and if they chose to pull it, to simply acknowledge the truth as to why. And if on the other hand there are extenuating circumstances why not state their are, even if for reasons of prudent corporate governance, they must not divulge those details. I, for one apparently lonely long time Prime supporter, would appreciate this level of transparency.

AvonDan 6y ago

Amazon and Amazon Prime have been very valuable recources to date. Perhaps, one of the reasons they have grown to such immense size. However, not to suggest I am enough alone able to influence them to speak up but better this tack than joining the undue or cancel crowd. Open mic is better.