Jump to content

Cancel culture


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, ICTChris said:

Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie has published an essay on her website about her experience of being condemned on social media by some of her former students. 

https://www.chimamanda.com/

Not sure if her website is working properly. 

That's a pretty grim story. But take out social media and "spat between writer and their former student" is a story as old as time is it not? 

Like the part I've taken out here is so funny to me. I'd put the odds heavily in favour of a writer in their 40s when Chimamanda was starting out saying almost exactly the same. It's just these darned kids for a social media age 

Screenshot_20210616-105748.jpg

Edited by Genuine Hibs Fan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

Quite odd to see the free speech champions snivelling about a companies right to advertise wherever they want.... Get it up them

GB News: Piers Morgan attacks Ikea for pulling advertising from news channel - BBC News

Nothing odd at all.

Firstly, Piers Morgan is not part of GBNews.

Having watched a little, they, in my opinion, haven’t covered

 any ‘hateful’ topics that haven’t been covered by other networks.

Ive seen segments on lockdown, taking the knee, Harry and Meghan, trade deals, just all the usual stuff.

There seems to be a reasonable mix of people from a wide range of affiliations.

You are of course correct in saying that advertisers are free to advertise where they wish.

The same thing happened to The Spectator and the power of the consumer soon put an end to it.

The same will happen with GBNews which is already doing well in terms of audience share.

Maybe take a look and make up your own mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GB News don't give a shit about advertisers anyway, the folk funding them have deep pockets even if they have given them a laughably small budget which is borne out in the absolute tinpot production values and constant technical issues they're having. It's just a vehicle for culture war nonsense and arguing that technically Epstein wasn't a paedophile/leave Prince Andrew alone. Their numbers will almost certainly plummet once the novelty wears off and it'll just be DPB and some more performing seals tuning in to watch Dan Wooton speak while the camera's trained on the door to the bathroom 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said:

GB News don't give a shit about advertisers anyway, the folk funding them have deep pockets even if they have given them a laughably small budget which is borne out in the absolute tinpot production values and constant technical issues they're having. It's just a vehicle for culture war nonsense and arguing that technically Epstein wasn't a paedophile/leave Prince Andrew alone. Their numbers will almost certainly plummet once the novelty wears off and it'll just be DPB and some more performing seals tuning in to watch Dan Wooton speak while the camera's trained on the door to the bathroom 

Time will tell.

The Guardian wouldn’t be in existence without the Trust Funds which support it.

Has never made a profit in recent times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

Nothing odd at all.

Firstly, Piers Morgan is not part of GBNews.

Having watched a little, they, in my opinion, haven’t covered

 any ‘hateful’ topics that haven’t been covered by other networks.

Ive seen segments on lockdown, taking the knee, Harry and Meghan, trade deals, just all the usual stuff.

There seems to be a reasonable mix of people from a wide range of affiliations.

You are of course correct in saying that advertisers are free to advertise where they wish.

The same thing happened to The Spectator and the power of the consumer soon put an end to it.

The same will happen with GBNews which is already doing well in terms of audience share.

Maybe take a look and make up your own mind.

Did you see the bit when they were jumping to defend Andrew Neil's pal Jeffery Epstein?

down playing his crimes claiming he wasn't a nonse. Of course when you are trafficking children for sex I'm not sure the label you get stuck on you matters all that much but I'm sure everyone would condemn those crimes, well everyone bar GB news of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, 101 said:

Did you see the bit when they were jumping to defend Andrew Neil's pal Jeffery Epstein?

down playing his crimes claiming he wasn't a nonse. Of course when you are trafficking children for sex I'm not sure the label you get stuck on you matters all that much but I'm sure everyone would condemn those crimes, well everyone bar GB news of course.

No.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

GB News don't give a shit about advertisers anyway, the folk funding them have deep pockets even if they have given them a laughably small budget which is borne out in the absolute tinpot production values and constant technical issues they're having. It's just a vehicle for culture war nonsense and arguing that technically Epstein wasn't a paedophile/leave Prince Andrew alone. Their numbers will almost certainly plummet once the novelty wears off and it'll just be DPB and some more performing seals tuning in to watch Dan Wooton speak while the camera's trained on the door to the bathroom 


I would tune in if they did a Metal Gear Solid here and allowed you to shift the camera focus to the toilets and hear Johnny Sasaki’s explosive diarrhoea as opposed to Dan Wooton’s verbal equivalent
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Genuine Hibs Fan said:

That's a pretty grim story. But take out social media and "spat between writer and their former student" is a story as old as time is it not? 

Like the part I've taken out here is so funny to me. I'd put the odds heavily in favour of a writer in their 40s when Chimamanda was starting out saying almost exactly the same. It's just these darned kids for a social media age 

Screenshot_20210616-105748.jpg

The former pupil publicly denounced her former mentor and posted threats of violence against her. I don’t think that’s just a ‘same old same old’ story of different generations. 

I don’t think you can take social media out of it either. This behaviour is only possible, really, due to social media. Obviously people, especially authors, have been denounced in the past but the ease of social media democratises this process, perhaps not in a positive way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Michael W said:

Wish someone would hurry up and cancel Piers Morgan so we don't need to listen to his constant whining about all and sundry. 

One of the benefits of age is that you can remember what people were saying and doing in the past, which can be a helpful guide to how seriously to take them on the present. Morgan, for example, was once touted as taking the Mirror back to its left wing campaigning roots. He rehired John Pilger and had the paper oppose the Iraq war, one of the few major papers to do so and the only tabloid (I think).  Of course, that all ended with him publishing obviously faked photos on the front page and getting sacked amid sales plummeting. He’s reinvented himself now as some sort of right wing populist, it’s all bullshit. He’s a terrible journalist, an appalling human being and he will literally say anything for attention. Best ignored.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ICTChris said:

Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie has published an essay on her website about her experience of being condemned on social media by some of her former students. 

https://www.chimamanda.com/

Not sure if her website is working properly. 

If you can't trust someone who's attempted to steal your identity to apply for a US visa, who can you trust?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

The former pupil publicly denounced her former mentor and posted threats of violence against her. I don’t think that’s just a ‘same old same old’ story of different generations. 

I don’t think you can take social media out of it either. This behaviour is only possible, really, due to social media. Obviously people, especially authors, have been denounced in the past but the ease of social media democratises this process, perhaps not in a positive way.

I dunno if I see a difference other than things being posted online tbh. And of course social media is the issue, sorry if unclear but that's what I was referring to  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...