Here we had a journalist so accustomed to pushing The Narrative that he apparently has no grasp of the facts. More importantly, it showed that despite launching a years-long crusade for social-media censorship, particularly against so-called hate speech, the corporate media are apparently incapable of defining what hate speech is. This of course is because no one can – not objectively, at least. One man’s hate speech is another man’s deeply held conviction. Which is why empowering the state or huge corporations to define and censor hate speech is so incredibly dangerous. These points have apparently never occurred to Clayton, as he bristles at all that ‘slightly’ hateful stuff on his timeline.
|
|||||
|
We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people. Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
Samizdata quote of the day – BBC gets Cathy Newman’ed by Elon MuskApril 13th, 2023 |
 12 comments to Samizdata quote of the day – BBC gets Cathy Newman’ed by Elon Musk |
Who Are We?The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling. We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
Good article from Slater. The suggestion that the BBC and similar organisations should be considered gatekeepers of truth is risible, not just because of their bias but because they are staffed by morons like Clayton, incapable of taking part in a reasoned argument.
The best line in Slater’s article is the last one.
“Tom Slater is editor of spiked. Follow him on Twitter: @Tom_Slater”
Mr Musk was polite and raised simple points that the BBC person was unable to answer.
To be fair to Mr Clayton – as Mr Slater implies, like all leftists he had been taught that both logical reasoning and empirical evidence are bad, reason and evidence are not his natural things – he has been taught to come out with the leftist line and, if it is challenged, he knows that a mob of fellow leftists will support him.
Being alone with a man who uses reason and evidence every day, and is wealthy enough not to be afraid of being “cancelled” (and, let us admit it, few of us are wealthy enough to be totally relaxed in the face of such threats) is outside Mr Clayton’s experience.
An excellent piece of writing by Mr Slater – as Fred Z points out Mr Slater is on Twitter and we should all follow him.
Here we had a journalist so accustomed to pushing The Narrative that he apparently has no grasp of the facts.
– Other than Andy Ngo, I can’t think of a single journalist who doesn’t fit this category ( – and if the interviewer didn’t fit it to a “T”, he most likely wouldn’t be working at the Beeb anyways…)
Please, it’s easy to define.
“Hate speech” is any speech the chattering classes wish you wouldn’t make, any opposition to their policy measures or goals or worldview (other than the acceptable “Farther Left” complaint that they should do more, and faster).
Sigvald – correct.
However, as you know – the “chattering classes” now control the security agencies and military forces of many Western nations, including the United States, and they would take great pleasure in using these “men with guns” (Professor Krugman’s rather unwoke way of putting it) against us.
So the “cancelling” may be rather more physical in nature than it used to be.
It reminds me of the time that Jordan Peterson turned the tables on Cathy Newman about 3-4 years back. That was a thing of beauty.
Marius: “The suggestion that the BBC and similar organisations should be considered gatekeepers of truth is risible…”
Yes, and it’s pathetic too. In a free society, they are but one source of opinionated news inter alia and no more deserving of an encomium than the Daily Mail.
Observe the title of the article: “- BBC gets Cathy Newman’ed” 😀
Along the same lines as the Beeb freaking out over Musk saying they were government funded and they demanded it be changed to something like publicly funded, claiming it’s because the TV licensing fee pays for it while omitting the whole men with guns kicking in doors to collect that fee part, NPR has done the same thing, only now they are going away for two whole weeks over it. Their claim is they only get like 3% of their 300m budget directly from the USG so they really shouldn’t be lumped in with “government funded” because that implies they are a mouthpiece.
Which of course they are.
Y. Knott:
A couple others: Greenwald and Taibbi. both pretty far to the left, but willing to challenge the orthodox doctrine, at least sometimes.
– but willing to challenge the orthodox doctrine, at least sometimes….
– I mean goodness, I even heard-of a CBC item CRITICIZING our Dear Leader! And even MOAR fantastical (if possible), it WASN’T for “Not Giving The CBC More Money”!!! And yes, I confess – I “heard of”, I didn’t see it myself. For the obvious reason; me, watch the CBC? And to this day I feel sorrow and pity for the poor shleb who WAS watching it that day, to gather that juicy tidbit for the rest of us beetle-browed proles.