3 ms·

That free speech crowd has been very very quiet the last week

by wnevets 1y ago

mayh4ps 1y ago
[dead]
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
sointeresting 1y ago
[flagged]
- markoman 1y ago
  Except that Kimmel's job was speech. He had a microphone -- and depended upon that (supposedly God-given) freedom of speech to perform that job. If he lost that job due to something that right didn't guarantee, then I'd understand. His dismissal's cause had nothing to do with a failure on his part. Instead we now have the government, specifically concerned with his criticisms of it, effectuating this block of Kimmel's speech and thereby ending his job. The government is supposed to guarantee your right to criticize it. What happened here?
  - sointeresting 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - mrbombastic 1y ago
      That’s not true
- romellem 1y ago
  Except all indications are the show was pulled because of pressure from the government. The FCC threatening “we can do this the easy way or the hard way” is not constitutional.
  - sointeresting 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - suzdude 1y ago
      https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/tv/disneys-abc-pulls-jimmy-kimmel-live-fcc-chair-blasts-hosts-charlie-kir-rcna232033 https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/tv/disneys-abc-pulls-jim... Please, don't contribute alt-facts to the conversation.
      - 3eb7988a1663 1y ago
        The notable quote ...ABC's move comes just hours after Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr threatened to “take action” against Disney and ABC over Kimmel's remarks. ...“We at the FCC are going to enforce the public interest obligation,” Carr said. “If there’s broadcasters out there that don’t like it, they can turn their license in to the FCC.”
    - deleted 1y ago
      [deleted]
- bediger4000 1y ago
  Heartily agree, but the 1st Amendment is supposed to protect you from FCC commissioners, and presidents and vice presidents restraining your speech, and that certainly looks like what happened here.
  - throwacct 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - Bratmon 1y ago
      So if the government passed a million-dollar fine for criticism of the ruling party, you would find that acceptable?
      - throwacct 1y ago
        Any criticism is protected under the 1st Amendment, and that includes what you just posted.
        Bratmon 1y ago
        But in this case, the government threatened to yank ABC's broadcast licenses (worth way more than $1m) if they didn't cancel Kimmel for criticizing the regime.
- StatsBlaster 1y ago
  The FCC chairman threatened to take action against ABC, only then did ABC take Kimmel off the air. So insteresting and convenient you chose to ignore that.
- cosmicgadget 1y ago
  The comment you replied to said "free speech" which is different from the First Amendment.
panarchy 1y ago
They're just going pull the "random leftists have individually boycotted people and media they don't agree with" (except they will call it cancel culture) card and do a false equivalency to people being removed for not being in line with the state.
f33d5173 1y ago
The left wing is the free speech crowd. The right wing has never had a principled belief in free speech. It was always their intention to turn cancel culture back at their enemies when the opportunity arose. I'm still reeling that it was supposed liberals that came up with "freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences" or "hate speech is not free speech" which are now being used against them. And they have learned absolutely nothing, and fully intend to go back to cancelling people for asinine reasons when they can.
- nxm 1y ago
  "The left wing is the free speech crowd. " You cannot be serious with the number of times they have actively cancelled just a speaker talking.
  - f33d5173 1y ago
    The left has a principled interest in free speech, which they've regularly abandoned. The right has used free speech rhetoric at times, but has no attachment to it as a principle.

That free speech crowd has been very very quiet the last week

mayh4ps 1y ago

[dead]

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

sointeresting 1y ago

[flagged]

markoman 1y ago
Except that Kimmel's job was speech. He had a microphone -- and depended upon that (supposedly God-given) freedom of speech to perform that job. If he lost that job due to something that right didn't guarantee, then I'd understand. His dismissal's cause had nothing to do with a failure on his part. Instead we now have the government, specifically concerned with his criticisms of it, effectuating this block of Kimmel's speech and thereby ending his job. The government is supposed to guarantee your right to criticize it. What happened here?
- sointeresting 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - mrbombastic 1y ago
    That’s not true
romellem 1y ago
Except all indications are the show was pulled because of pressure from the government. The FCC threatening “we can do this the easy way or the hard way” is not constitutional.
- sointeresting 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - suzdude 1y ago
    https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/tv/disneys-abc-pulls-jimmy-kimmel-live-fcc-chair-blasts-hosts-charlie-kir-rcna232033 https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/tv/disneys-abc-pulls-jim... Please, don't contribute alt-facts to the conversation.
    - 3eb7988a1663 1y ago
      The notable quote ...ABC's move comes just hours after Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr threatened to “take action” against Disney and ABC over Kimmel's remarks. ...“We at the FCC are going to enforce the public interest obligation,” Carr said. “If there’s broadcasters out there that don’t like it, they can turn their license in to the FCC.”
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
bediger4000 1y ago
Heartily agree, but the 1st Amendment is supposed to protect you from FCC commissioners, and presidents and vice presidents restraining your speech, and that certainly looks like what happened here.
- throwacct 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - Bratmon 1y ago
    So if the government passed a million-dollar fine for criticism of the ruling party, you would find that acceptable?
    - throwacct 1y ago
      Any criticism is protected under the 1st Amendment, and that includes what you just posted.
      - Bratmon 1y ago
        But in this case, the government threatened to yank ABC's broadcast licenses (worth way more than $1m) if they didn't cancel Kimmel for criticizing the regime.
StatsBlaster 1y ago
The FCC chairman threatened to take action against ABC, only then did ABC take Kimmel off the air. So insteresting and convenient you chose to ignore that.
cosmicgadget 1y ago
The comment you replied to said "free speech" which is different from the First Amendment.

panarchy 1y ago

They're just going pull the "random leftists have individually boycotted people and media they don't agree with" (except they will call it cancel culture) card and do a false equivalency to people being removed for not being in line with the state.

f33d5173 1y ago

The left wing is the free speech crowd. The right wing has never had a principled belief in free speech. It was always their intention to turn cancel culture back at their enemies when the opportunity arose. I'm still reeling that it was supposed liberals that came up with "freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences" or "hate speech is not free speech" which are now being used against them. And they have learned absolutely nothing, and fully intend to go back to cancelling people for asinine reasons when they can.

nxm 1y ago
"The left wing is the free speech crowd. " You cannot be serious with the number of times they have actively cancelled just a speaker talking.
- f33d5173 1y ago
  The left has a principled interest in free speech, which they've regularly abandoned. The right has used free speech rhetoric at times, but has no attachment to it as a principle.