First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
Post Reply "It's Not Censorship When WE Do It!"
11622 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 10/26/15

maxgale

Or do you not understand memes, either?


Us older folks might be a bit behind the curve when it comes to such things
35035 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 10/26/15 , edited 10/26/15

maxgale wrote:

But viewing it through such a flawed framework avoids the fact as to who exactly the audience is (or might be replaced by), and more importantly the fact that the topic was literally discussion about whether or not the Left recognizes censorship as such when they are doing it, and the wider question of what "equality under censorship" means.


You (and in fact content creators, for that matter) don't get to dictate the audience's composition, only to state your intended audience. The case example you've provided of censorship run amok (a mangaka having to alter her story's plot in response to consumer complaints) didn't hold up.

If you're worried about trigger warnings we don't even have to view that in a "left vs. right" lens. You could just as easily examine the whole thing through a comparison between advisory ratings systems that flag works containing nudity, violence, sexual content, and so on that have been in place for decades and trigger warnings to determine whether one or both constitutes censorship and whether/when this censorship is appropriate. Why is that not just as legitimate a discussion addressing the same topic minus the partisan spin? How is that any less productive than you and everyone else getting mired down in another argument about definitions?

Can trigger warnings be abused? Sure. A publisher might selectively apply them to some works and not others, playing favourites with their advice to prospective audience members. Could that result in some works' commercial viability being negatively impacted unfairly? Absolutely. Is that something we've seen happen with advisory ratings systems for films and television? You bet we have. Is that sufficient to disqualify advisory statements for the benefit of audiences as a concept, doing away with advisory rating systems (which are basically what trigger warnings are trying to be)? Not really since they're still useful for keeping prospective audience members abreast of what they're getting into. It does, however, mean that media needs watchdogs to make sure companies aren't abusing those systems to rig the game.

There, see how I did that without the whole partisan angle?
17077 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
44 / M / Verginia
Offline
Posted 10/26/15
Triggers... Seriously, have any of you self absorbed twits actually gone without a meal? I'm sorry but i call bullshit on this whole thread. For the last 4 pages it has had nothing to do with the opnining and should be locked
11622 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 10/26/15

bernardwheelerjr wrote:

Triggers... Seriously, have any of you self absorbed twits actually gone without a meal? I'm sorry but i call bullshit on this whole thread. For the last 4 pages it has had nothing to do with the opnining and should be locked


And this folks is exactly how you get banned around here. Might want to change that tune of yours kiddo.
wyrvan 
59210 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
45 / M
Online
Posted 10/26/15

bernardwheelerjr wrote:



Just a question, have either one of you actually read that ray bradbury clasic, or you two just googling your arguments? I strongly suggest you put down your digital toys, go to your nearest public library, and yes, perish the thought actually sit down and read a novel. And when you are done i reccomend Izac Azimov's robots and empire series. Then graduate to robert heinlin's works.
Gawd i hate it when people lazy google quote works they have never taken the time and effort to read.
Azimov gives a presentiant view of the world were technoligy trumps actula human contact (i imagine this is something you two are intimately familiar with)
Heinlin explores relidion in " a stranger in a strange land" and the inherrent injustice in the prizon system in "the moon is a harsh mistress"
Again stop googling your quotes and actually read a book.


Yes, I have read it. In fact, I got it near me. Do you want me to type in direct quotes from the book?


17077 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
44 / M / Verginia
Offline
Posted 10/26/15

dotsforlife wrote:


bernardwheelerjr wrote:

Triggers... Seriously, have any of you self absorbed twits actually gone without a meal? I'm sorry but i call bullshit on this whole thread. For the last 4 pages it has had nothing to do with the opnining and should be locked


And this folks is exactly how you get banned around here. Might want to change that tune of yours kiddo.


The op was about cencoring liturtaure clasics and not about the current "trigger" bs that is going around. So as i am 44years old kid. How is my calling a mods attention to the fact this thread is getting way off topic a bannable offence kid?
11622 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 10/26/15

bernardwheelerjr

The op was about cencoring liturtaure clasics and not about the current "trigger" bs that is going around. So as i am 44years old kid. How is my calling a mods attention to the fact this thread is getting way off topic a bannable offence kid?


I call people kids when they act like them. No need to insult anyone here. The 2 kids are having a discussion and while it may jump a little they're keeping it civil and even poking some fun at each other. Though you might not see that. Perhaps you should read the forums rules so you don't have to deal with mods getting unpleasant with you.
16757 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 10/26/15 , edited 10/26/15

toxxin wrote:


Rujikin wrote:

Everything is insulting to someone. Everyone on here are watching things that someone finds morally corrupt or offensive. Therefore ban everything to avoid offending anyone.


You say that jokingly but there are progressives who truly think that way and its disturbing how willing administration entities and public figures are to subserviently give them everything they want for fear of social media repercussions.

Nothing should be sacred and everything should be up for debate; plain and simple.


Agreed. Freedom of speech comes with all the good and bad associated with it. EVERYTHING no matter how insulting or offensive should be discussed if we want to actually progress as a society. Here I'll start:

Black scholarships exist all over the USA and are considered a good thing but "white" scholarships are considered racist and offensive. We should either ban all specific category scholarships or allow all types of scholarships regardless of if they offend someone or not.
17077 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
44 / M / Verginia
Offline
Posted 10/26/15

wyrvan wrote:


bernardwheelerjr wrote:



Just a question, have either one of you actually read that ray bradbury clasic, or you two just googling your arguments? I strongly suggest you put down your digital toys, go to your nearest public library, and yes, perish the thought actually sit down and read a novel. And when you are done i reccomend Izac Azimov's robots and empire series. Then graduate to robert heinlin's works.
Gawd i hate it when people lazy google quote works they have never taken the time and effort to read.
Azimov gives a presentiant view of the world were technoligy trumps actula human contact (i imagine this is something you two are intimately familiar with)
Heinlin explores relidion in " a stranger in a strange land" and the inherrent injustice in the prizon system in "the moon is a harsh mistress"
Again stop googling your quotes and actually read a book.


Yes, I have read it. In fact, I got it near me. Do you want me to type in direct quotes from the book?




Awesome, it is one of my top 10 favorite scifi clasics. Nowhere near heinlins stranger in a strange land or azimovs robots or empire epics but great nonetheless :-D
27451 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / USA! USA! USA!
Offline
Posted 10/26/15 , edited 10/26/15

dotsforlife wrote:


maxgale

Or do you not understand memes, either?


Us older folks might be a bit behind the curve when it comes to such things


It's from the third Batman movie directed by Christopher Nolan, and is paraphrasing something the character Bane says.




BlueOni wrote:


maxgale wrote:

But viewing it through such a flawed framework avoids the fact as to who exactly the audience is (or might be replaced by), and more importantly the fact that the topic was literally discussion about whether or not the Left recognizes censorship as such when they are doing it, and the wider question of what "equality under censorship" means.


You (and in fact content creators, for that matter) don't get to dictate the audience's composition, only to state your intended audience. The case example you've provided of censorship run amok (a mangaka having to alter her story's plot in response to consumer complaints) didn't hold up.

If you're worried about trigger warnings we don't even have to view that in a "left vs. right" lens. You could just as easily examine the whole thing through a comparison between advisory ratings systems that flag works containing nudity, violence, sexual content, and so on that have been in place for decades and trigger warnings to determine whether one or both constitutes censorship and whether/when this censorship is appropriate. Why is that not just as legitimate a discussion addressing the same topic minus the partisan spin? How is that any less productive than you and everyone else getting mired down in another argument about definitions?

Can trigger warnings be abused? Sure. A publisher might selectively apply them to some works and not others, playing favourites with their advice to prospective audience members. Could that result in some works' commercial viability being negatively impacted unfairly? Absolutely. Is that something we've seen happen with advisory ratings systems for films and television? You bet we have. Is that sufficient to disqualify advisory statements for the benefit of audiences as a concept, doing away with advisory rating systems (which are basically what trigger warnings are trying to be)? Not really since they're still useful for keeping prospective audience members abreast of what they're getting into. It does, however, mean that media needs watchdogs to make sure companies aren't abusing those systems to rig the game.

There, see how I did that without the whole partisan angle?




Content creators do get to dictate the composition of the audience. Their audience is whomever is willing to buy what they are selling. Simple as that. If someone isn't buying what they are selling, they are not the audience. Your counterargument that those who voiced displeasure does not hold up, as from what reports were given it appears that the outcry was larger than the actual audience of the magazine. When THAT occurs, it definitely is a case of someone other than the audience attempting to hold sway over content.


Film content ratings aren't trigger warnings so much as a form of consumer education, for the purpose of letting one know whether or not the film was appropriate for all ages, or certain ages. That is fundamentally different than trigger warnings in an environment where the participants are already of age and of which the purpose is to keep those people of age from encountering that content. It is then important to recognize that this is because one party out of the two party system in the most powerful country on earth believes adults cannot make their own choices.


And as such, the same reason that movie ratings are not the same as trigger warnings also apply to the other examples of ratings you gave for TV, etc.







bernardwheelerjr wrote:


dotsforlife wrote:


bernardwheelerjr wrote:

Triggers... Seriously, have any of you self absorbed twits actually gone without a meal? I'm sorry but i call bullshit on this whole thread. For the last 4 pages it has had nothing to do with the opnining and should be locked


And this folks is exactly how you get banned around here. Might want to change that tune of yours kiddo.


The op was about cencoring liturtaure clasics and not about the current "trigger" bs that is going around. So as i am 44years old kid. How is my calling a mods attention to the fact this thread is getting way off topic a bannable offence kid?





Did you not read the article that was linked in the opening post?
17077 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
44 / M / Verginia
Offline
Posted 10/26/15

dotsforlife wrote:


bernardwheelerjr

The op was about cencoring liturtaure clasics and not about the current "trigger" bs that is going around. So as i am 44years old kid. How is my calling a mods attention to the fact this thread is getting way off topic a bannable offence kid?


I call people kids when they act like them. No need to insult anyone here. The 2 kids are having a discussion and while it may jump a little they're keeping it civil and even poking some fun at each other. Though you might not see that. Perhaps you should read the forums rules so you don't have to deal with mods getting unpleasant with you.


The mods have never gotten unplesant with me ever over the years that i have been a premimum member. As you are not a mod.... Well whatever lmao
11622 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 10/26/15

maxgale

It's from the third Batman movie directed by Christopher Nolan, and is paraphrasing something the character Bane says.



Speaking of censoring. Didn't they censor some Batman related show around the time of that movie?
35035 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 10/26/15

maxgale wrote:

The matter is more when they attempt to unduly wield economic sway comparative to their size as a percentage of the overall audience and the tactics they use to try to hold that sway, or when they tried to crowd out other members of the audience to retain their sway (much like otaku in general have made anime anathema to the general public).


Consumers are allowed to aggregate into groups and advocate for their interests to producers. That shouldn't be a controversial notion.


As far as the grannies go, yes, the key difference can be summed up in the difference between the individual actor and the efforts of a concerted politic. The former is mostly expressed as a form of venting (and even if actually more than that, the power relationship is that of the individual making the demand as an individual in the market, and recognize as such that they are only one member of it). The latter as a way to impose upon, deny, or destroy, and attempts to exert power over the market that is not representative of their size in relation to the overall audience. For example, if a Brony were to write a letter to Hasboro saying, "It sucks that Pony X isn't in the show, I don't want to watch it if that character doesn't get more scenes." Compared to Bronies decide they need to get Pony X in the show and decide to show up to a public event where the young female fans of the show are surrounded by Bronies shouting "No Pony, No Justice!" and create economic harm for the brand with the threat that they'll only cease when their demands are met.

And even then, that is being charitable and assuming they actually are part of the market, and not intending solely to censor that which disagrees with their sensibilities.


Neither is an example of economic terrorism. Economic terrorism would be taking advantage of a vulnerability in a major stock exchange's information systems and networks to disrupt accurate reporting of share prices or interfere with trading. Grannies getting together and holding a letter campaign isn't terrorism. Bronies getting together in protest at a public event and calling for Pony X to get more airtime isn't terrorism, though it may be considered creation of a public disturbance and warrant removal from the grounds if they're especially disruptive. If they refuse to obey the lawful orders of on duty officials to vacate they might face more charges, but economic terrorism would be a pretty ludicrous jump in charges.
wyrvan 
59210 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
45 / M
Online
Posted 10/26/15

bernardwheelerjr wrote:

Awesome, it is one of my top 10 favorite scifi clasics. Nowhere near heinlins stranger in a strange land or azimovs robots or empire epics but great nonetheless :-D


I grew up with all three of those authors. Loved their books.

If you reread Fahrenheit 451 today in the context of some of the political and social arguments being made today, it gets very scary. So much of Beatty's explanation of how it got this way is so going on right now that it makes you wonder how much longer before fire trucks start carrying kerosene instead of water.
27451 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / USA! USA! USA!
Offline
Posted 10/26/15

dotsforlife wrote:


maxgale

It's from the third Batman movie directed by Christopher Nolan, and is paraphrasing something the character Bane says.



Speaking of censoring. Didn't they censor some Batman related show around the time of that movie?


I think the only Batman show was the prequel thing on FOX, but I didn't watch that, shame if it did get censored.




BlueOni wrote:


maxgale wrote:

The matter is more when they attempt to unduly wield economic sway comparative to their size as a percentage of the overall audience and the tactics they use to try to hold that sway, or when they tried to crowd out other members of the audience to retain their sway (much like otaku in general have made anime anathema to the general public).


Consumers are allowed to aggregate into groups and advocate for their interests to producers. That shouldn't be a controversial notion.


As far as the grannies go, yes, the key difference can be summed up in the difference between the individual actor and the efforts of a concerted politic. The former is mostly expressed as a form of venting (and even if actually more than that, the power relationship is that of the individual making the demand as an individual in the market, and recognize as such that they are only one member of it). The latter as a way to impose upon, deny, or destroy, and attempts to exert power over the market that is not representative of their size in relation to the overall audience. For example, if a Brony were to write a letter to Hasboro saying, "It sucks that Pony X isn't in the show, I don't want to watch it if that character doesn't get more scenes." Compared to Bronies decide they need to get Pony X in the show and decide to show up to a public event where the young female fans of the show are surrounded by Bronies shouting "No Pony, No Justice!" and create economic harm for the brand with the threat that they'll only cease when their demands are met.

And even then, that is being charitable and assuming they actually are part of the market, and not intending solely to censor that which disagrees with their sensibilities.


Neither is an example of economic terrorism. Economic terrorism would be taking advantage of a vulnerability in a major stock exchange's information systems and networks to disrupt accurate reporting of share prices or interfere with trading. Grannies getting together and holding a letter campaign isn't terrorism. Bronies getting together in protest at a public event and calling for Pony X to get more airtime isn't terrorism, though it may be considered creation of a public disturbance and warrant removal from the grounds if they're especially disruptive. If they refuse to obey the lawful orders of on duty officials to vacate they might face more charges, but economic terrorism would be a pretty ludicrous jump in charges.



But if they aren't actually buying the product, they can't be called consumers.





Causing economic harm in the pursuit of a political, religious, or cultural goal, or intimidation through economic harm is the very definition of it (mostly because its applicable to things that law around extortion and similar behaviours don't cover).



First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.