The West has lost its freedom of speech

[qldfrog]

Would be interesting if NZ knew of his philosophy before he went there, if so why did they let him in ?

Well, in short, his philosophy is a book ,and it is fashionable to pretend it is not.
You can read a book and not follow it,we all agree..yet we can not pretend to ignore it.

 

[moXJO]

Would be interesting if NZ knew of his philosophy before he went there, if so why did they let him in ?

New Zealand is honestly a weird mix.
We just assume if it comes to the worst that we can handle it one way or the other.

I do think they just decided to shoot the guy after reading witness accounts. No warning just blam with a serving of 9mm justice.

 

[sptrawler]

Really interesting, a reporter who did an article on Pauline Hanson's personal life, had to cancel it. Nothing like being heard is there. ?
The only people who can now be heard, are those that are allowed to be heard, this is really getting crazy.
I guess, unless you are in step with the ranters and chanters, even a casual interview isn't allowed.
Welcome to the new world.

Jessica Rowe pulls podcast interview with Pauline Hanson after backlash

The interview, which focused on Hanson’s life away from politics, drew widespread criticism on social media.

www.theage.com.au

From the article:
Journalist and TV presenter Jessica Rowe has deleted a podcast she recorded with Pauline Hanson after it sparked widespread criticism on social media.

Promoting the episode on Twitter on Wednesday, the former Studio 10 host had said the interview with Hanson - from her The Jess Rowe Big Talk Show podcast - “isn’t about politics” but instead focused on “love, raising kids, and why [Hanson] keeps going”.
But it quickly triggered a backlash online, with many prominent commentators - including Australian of the Year Grace Tame - criticising Rowe for platforming the One Nation leader.
“This is how discrimination and hate is subtly enabled and normalised,” Tame wrote on Twitter. “Pauline doesn’t need help to be heard, but those whose oppression she’s both driven and reinforced do.”

On Thursday, Rowe took to Instagram to explain that she had listened to the criticisms and asked her podcast publisher Listnr to “take down the Pauline Hanson episode”.

 

[wayneL]

Really interesting, a reporter who did an article on Pauline Hanson's personal life, had to cancel it. Nothing like being heard is there. ?
The only people who can now be heard, are those that are allowed to be heard, this is really getting crazy.
I guess, unless you are in step with the ranters and chanters, even a casual interview isn't allowed.
Welcome to the new world.

Jessica Rowe pulls podcast interview with Pauline Hanson after backlash

The interview, which focused on Hanson’s life away from politics, drew widespread criticism on social media.

www.theage.com.au

From the article:
Journalist and TV presenter Jessica Rowe has deleted a podcast she recorded with Pauline Hanson after it sparked widespread criticism on social media.

Promoting the episode on Twitter on Wednesday, the former Studio 10 host had said the interview with Hanson - from her The Jess Rowe Big Talk Show podcast - “isn’t about politics” but instead focused on “love, raising kids, and why [Hanson] keeps going”.
But it quickly triggered a backlash online, with many prominent commentators - including Australian of the Year Grace Tame - criticising Rowe for platforming the One Nation leader.
“This is how discrimination and hate is subtly enabled and normalised,” Tame wrote on Twitter. “Pauline doesn’t need help to be heard, but those whose oppression she’s both driven and reinforced do.”

On Thursday, Rowe took to Instagram to explain that she had listened to the criticisms and asked her podcast publisher Listnr to “take down the Pauline Hanson episode”.

Jess *nearly had some journalistic cojones, but exposed her leftist yellow streak at the last minute.

Nearly ballsy, but cowardly in the end.

 

[sptrawler]

Jess *nearly had some journalistic cojones, but exposed her leftist yellow streak at the last minute.

Nearly ballsy, but cowardly in the end.

It is starting to get somewhat like vocal minority censorship, if people can't hear both sides of an issue, they can't make valid analysis.
The way things are going the country is going to be driven by ideological dreams, rather than realistic progressive technological and economical reasoning.
I actually don't have a problem with it, at my age it will have minimal effect on me and my kids and grandkids will adapt, humans do.
But whether it is a better life, only time will tell.

 

[rederob]

Really interesting, a reporter who did an article on Pauline Hanson's personal life, had to cancel it. Nothing like being heard is there. ?
The only people who can now be heard, are those that are allowed to be heard, this is really getting crazy.
I guess, unless you are in step with the ranters and chanters, even a casual interview isn't allowed.
Welcome to the new world.

Jessica Rowe pulls podcast interview with Pauline Hanson after backlash

The interview, which focused on Hanson’s life away from politics, drew widespread criticism on social media.

www.theage.com.au

From the article:
Journalist and TV presenter Jessica Rowe has deleted a podcast she recorded with Pauline Hanson after it sparked widespread criticism on social media.

Promoting the episode on Twitter on Wednesday, the former Studio 10 host had said the interview with Hanson - from her The Jess Rowe Big Talk Show podcast - “isn’t about politics” but instead focused on “love, raising kids, and why [Hanson] keeps going”.
But it quickly triggered a backlash online, with many prominent commentators - including Australian of the Year Grace Tame - criticising Rowe for platforming the One Nation leader.
“This is how discrimination and hate is subtly enabled and normalised,” Tame wrote on Twitter. “Pauline doesn’t need help to be heard, but those whose oppression she’s both driven and reinforced do.”

On Thursday, Rowe took to Instagram to explain that she had listened to the criticisms and asked her podcast publisher Listnr to “take down the Pauline Hanson episode”.

Rowe chose to pull the podcast.
Idiots like Hanson get ample media attention and her spreading more vitriol at every opportunity does not bode well for an accepting society.
Rowe did the intelligent thing, and listened to people with more sense.
The ranters and chanters you talk about are in fact the Hanson's of the world, so you seem to have created your own storm in a tea cup.

 

[sptrawler]

Rowe chose to pull the podcast.

After the backlash, from the opposite end of the spectrum.
No storm in a teacup, it's par for course these days.

 

[moXJO]

First off- how many people are listening to a Rowe podcast?

Secondly, did we expect anything different from the glitterati.

 

[rederob]

After the backlash, from the opposite end of the spectrum.
No storm in a teacup, it's par for course these days.

You fail to see the irony in your post!
People are free to give their opinions on what others say - your so called backlash.
Rowe, on hearing some sound opinions, realised offering even more oxygen to a fruitcake was not a smart move so chose to exercise her prerogative and withdraw the podcast.
Hanson is free to stand on a street corner and repeat whatever she said to Rowe, but she has no say in what Rowe chooses to air, or remove.
Getting your knockers in a knit about a matter that was never about free speech was more like a hurricane in a thimble.

 

[sptrawler]

The article apparently was a human interest story, but obviously only those which interest a certain sector, can be allowed through.
As you say those who don't fit the loony left bill, can go and stand on a street corner. Lol
A bit like a lot of posters probably think you and I are fruitloops, but they don't ask Joe to take us down, they can just ignore.
That seems a lot better than radical censorship, by the self obsessed fighters for their right to shut people up. Lol
In reality IMO they are no better than Hanson, just the other end of the spectrum.

 

[rederob]

The article apparently was a human interest story, but obviously only those which interest a certain sector, can be allowed through.
As you say those who don't fit the loony left bill, can go and stand on a street corner. Lol

You just don't get it, especially the irony!
Hanson and anyone else who wants to pour their heart out on a street corner is free to do so.
Who chooses to "air" what anyone says is not about "free speech".
Moreover, those choosing to air anything often act wisely in withdrawing material they consider inappropriate. Lots of media outlets are now withdrawing anti-vaxxer material, and we all know about what happened with Trump.
Rowe could have done nothing if she thought the podcast to be in keeping with her intentions, but clearly she has a functioning brain, unlike Hanson!

 

[sptrawler]

You just don't get it, especially the irony!
Hanson and anyone else who wants to pour their heart out on a street corner is free to do so.
Who chooses to "air" what anyone says is not about "free speech".
Moreover, those choosing to air anything often act wisely in withdrawing material they consider inappropriate. Lots of media outlets are now withdrawing anti-vaxxer material, and we all know about what happened with Trump.
Rowe could have done nothing if she thought the podcast to be in keeping with her intentions, but clearly she has a functioning brain, unlike Hanson!

That's the whole issue, which as usual you fail to grasp, the issue is who considers it inappropriate.
Rowe felt it was a reasonable human interest story, therefore she spent her time and effort and Hanson's time and effort, to write an article and post it on her site.
A small group of self opinionated, self righteous muppets, decide that in their opinion Hanson shouldn't be given a stage.
So they go about applying public pressure to close that avenue for Hanson, as you would do, by saying she should only be allowed a stage on a street corner, because you don't agree with her beliefs.
But she is an elected public figure, therefore she represents the beliefs of those people who elected her, you or the others don't have the right to dictate where or how she can address the concerns of those who legally elected her.
The same as I have no right to demand Keating isn't given airplay, just because he isn't my cup of tea.
When the loony left has shut down all who speak up against them, there will be an opposite and equal reaction, by the sector that feels disenfranchised.
Or as someone once said.
"Idiots like Hanson get ample media attention and her spreading more vitriol at every opportunity does not bode well for an accepting society".

Accepting society, what a nice phrase, when we are an accepting society, we accept other people have different views.

The loony left give lip service to all these catchy words, like inclusive, accepting etc, when in fact they are just as spiteful and nasty as the loony right IMO.
Extremism is extremism, whichever end of the spectrum it is on.

 

[wayneL]

The only irony here is the extreme leftists here nitpicking minor points and failing to see the trajectory.

 

[rederob]

That's the whole issue, which as usual you fail to grasp, the issue is who considers it inappropriate.
Rowe felt it was a reasonable human interest story, therefore she spent her time and effort and Hanson's time and effort, to write an article and post it on her site.
A small group of self opinionated, self righteous muppets, decide that in their opinion Hanson shouldn't be given a stage.
So they go about applying public pressure to close that avenue for Hanson, as you would do, by saying she should only be allowed a stage on a street corner, because you don't agree with her beliefs.
But she is an elected public figure, therefore she represents the beliefs of those people who elected her, you or the others don't have the right to dictate where or how she can address the concerns of those who legally elected her.
The same as I have no right to demand Keating isn't given airplay, just because he isn't my cup of tea.
When the loony left has shut down all who speak up against them, there will be an opposite and equal reaction, by the sector that feels disenfranchised.
Or as someone once said.
"Idiots like Hanson get ample media attention and her spreading more vitriol at every opportunity does not bode well for an accepting society".

Accepting society, what a nice phrase, when we are an accepting society, we accept other people have different views.

The loony left give lip service to all these catchy words, like inclusive, accepting etc, when in fact they are just as spiteful and nasty as the loony right IMO.
Extremism is extremism, whichever end of the spectrum it is on.

This is supposed to be about "free speech".
If you are concerned about what is aired using media then take those concerns elsewhere.
As I said, you just don't get it.

 

[sptrawler]

This is supposed to be about "free speech".
If you are concerned about what is aired using media then take those concerns elsewhere.
As I said, you just don't get it.

"Free speech" isn't one dimensional, even though some sectors would like it to be, the ability to have your say freely and openly without censorship from pressure groups, is exactly what "free speech" is about.

I haven't told you what to do, but as per usual, you have no qualms trying to impose your will on me, where's the acceptance and inclusiveness Rob? ?

 

[IFocus]

"Free speech" isn't one dimensional, even though some sectors would like it to be, the ability to have your say freely and openly without censorship from pressure groups, is exactly what "free speech" is about.

I haven't told you what to do, but as per usual, you have no qualms trying to impose your will on me, where's the acceptance and inclusiveness Rob? ?

Common SP pick some one else for your target Hanson was the worst kind of politician a real abomination.

Ran the dog whistle race / culture war, white victim card all the way to get a headline really disgusting IMHO.

Totally played divisive politics appealing to the dark side of human nature and brought SFA to Federal Parliament while gaming money out of the political party funding mechanisms.

The issue as Rob says has nothing to do with freedom of speech everyone gets to have an opinion including Rowe, I would image it was commercial / sponsorship interests the caused the withdrawal.

 

[IFocus]

First off- how many people are listening to a Rowe podcast?

Haha yeah exactly

 

[sptrawler]

Common SP pick some one else for your target Hanson was the worst kind of politician a real abomination.

Ran the dog whistle race / culture war, white victim card all the way to get a headline really disgusting IMHO.

Totally played divisive politics appealing to the dark side of human nature and brought SFA to Federal Parliament while gaming money out of the political party funding mechanisms.

The issue as Rob says has nothing to do with freedom of speech everyone gets to have an opinion including Rowe, I would image it was commercial / sponsorship interests the caused the withdrawal.

Come on IFocus, Rob doesn't need a hand, bit of left wing tag teaming going on eh.

Whether Hanson is the biggest turd or not isn't the issue, she still represents people and the issue is as per the thread heading, "the West has lost its freedom of speech".
That is becoming more and more obvious with the cancel culture, as with Rob, just because you guys say it isn't so doesn't exactly make it accurate.
The centre group, who I class myself as a member of, can see the ebbs and flows of the narrative because we actually don't give a rats one way or the other. ?
The problem is that extremists of either left or right, who try to curb people having a say, just because they don't agree with their point of view is wrong.
It has happened throughout history and it is repeating as we speak.
The left say they are accepting of everyone, tolerant and inclusive of everyone, when they really are the opposite IMO.
A bit like religion, the church said they were there for everyone and they were a refuge for the helpless, well we know how that worked out.

 

[rederob]

"Free speech" isn't one dimensional, even though some sectors would like it to be, the ability to have your say freely and openly without censorship from pressure groups, is exactly what "free speech" is about.

I haven't told you what to do, but as per usual, you have no qualms trying to impose your will on me, where's the acceptance and inclusiveness Rob? ?

You still don't get it!
Nothing stops YOU or anyone else going out into a public place and saying what you want. That's free speech.
Clearly, there are some things best not said unless you want to leave yourself open to litigation - there are well established laws that most people would be aware of and these constrain us.
However, try to get your opinions etc. aired in a media platform that you have no control over (and cannot "join") and see how you go. Even here at ASF @Joe Blow can always delete anything he does not like should he so choose, aside from deleting posts contravening his rules. Such deletions have zip to do with free speech.

 

[sptrawler]

However, try to get your opinions etc. aired in a media platform that you have no control over (and cannot "join") and see how you go. Even here at ASF @Joe Blow can always delete anything he does not like should he so choose, aside from deleting posts contravening his rules. Such deletions have zip to do with free speech.

Rowe approached Hanson, for an interview, then Rowe published said interview, then left wing loonies went viral so Rowe removed said content.
We aren't talking letter of the law here Rob, we are talking perceptions and as you say an accepting society.
As I said the left aren't accepting and inclusive and they do stymie free speech, if the speech is something they don't agree with.

I think I'm middle of the road, accepting and inclusive, I've been a member of ASF for over 10 years and never been on an ignore, so obviously I listen and debate in a reasonable manner.
Yet you say quote:
If you are concerned about what is aired using media then take those concerns elsewhere.
How's that not passive aggressive, it's definitely not an accepting attitude, that we are trying to nurture in our society.

As I sai, I've been on the forum for over 10 years and not been on anyone's ignore list, that's because I know what being accepting and inclusive is.