Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 21 of 21
  1. #16
    Astonishing Member dancj's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,568

    Default

    It does make me a little uncomfortable - especially considering Woody Allen hasn't actually been convicted of anything.

    One publisher isn't a huge deal though. I'd have a bigger issue if it was a huge retailer like Walmart or Amazon, or entire platforms like Kindle or Apple Music who act like this. That's when it really limits people's access to things.

    You can still listen to Gary Glitter on Apple Music though, so Apple don't seem to be taking this stance.

  2. #17
    Ultimate Member babyblob's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    New Richmond Ohio
    Posts
    12,246

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dancj View Post
    It does make me a little uncomfortable - especially considering Woody Allen hasn't actually been convicted of anything.

    One publisher isn't a huge deal though. I'd have a bigger issue if it was a huge retailer like Walmart or Amazon, or entire platforms like Kindle or Apple Music who act like this. That's when it really limits people's access to things.

    You can still listen to Gary Glitter on Apple Music though, so Apple don't seem to be taking this stance.
    The thing is in this country you dont have to be convicted in a court of law. Just the court of public opinion. Look at how many people have been fired from their jobs just from accusations. I get suspending them while an investigation is ongoing. But to fire them, smear their name and ruin careers just based off of someone's word is wrong. We have gone from innocent until proven guilty to sting them up at the first sign of an accusation. It bothers me.
    This Post Contains No Artificial Intelligence. It Contains No Human Intelligence Either.

  3. #18
    Extraordinary Member kjn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    4,875

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tbaron View Post
    The thing is in this country you dont have to be convicted in a court of law. Just the court of public opinion. Look at how many people have been fired from their jobs just from accusations. I get suspending them while an investigation is ongoing. But to fire them, smear their name and ruin careers just based off of someone's word is wrong. We have gone from innocent until proven guilty to sting them up at the first sign of an accusation. It bothers me.
    I certainly get that objection, and it's a valid one (though arguably not directly relevant to this particular case).

    However, we live in a society where women historically have been disbelieved or brushed aside when they have brought in cases of sexual harassment, or the blame has been placed on them. This is a situation that has been going on for several hundreds of years, and is endemic all over the world. Rooting it out will require extraordinary measures. And the only way to get away from the court of public opinion is for the people who supposedly are to investigate these cases really take that job seriously.

    To put it another way, I can just about guarantee that many more women have had their careers disrupted over harassment aimed at them, than the relatively few men who have been convicted in some way (either in public courts or the court of public opinion).

    Do I like the court of public opinion? No. But far too often it is all that is left as an option. In most cases, it's a dangerous and fickle option.
    «Speaking generally, it is because of the desire of the tragic poets for the marvellous that so varied and inconsistent an account of Medea has been given out» (Diodorus Siculus, The Library of History [4.56.1])

  4. #19
    Ultimate Member babyblob's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    New Richmond Ohio
    Posts
    12,246

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kjn View Post
    I certainly get that objection, and it's a valid one (though arguably not directly relevant to this particular case).

    However, we live in a society where women historically have been disbelieved or brushed aside when they have brought in cases of sexual harassment, or the blame has been placed on them. This is a situation that has been going on for several hundreds of years, and is endemic all over the world. Rooting it out will require extraordinary measures. And the only way to get away from the court of public opinion is for the people who supposedly are to investigate these cases really take that job seriously.

    To put it another way, I can just about guarantee that many more women have had their careers disrupted over harassment aimed at them, than the relatively few men who have been convicted in some way (either in public courts or the court of public opinion).

    Do I like the court of public opinion? No. But far too often it is all that is left as an option. In most cases, it's a dangerous and fickle option.
    Your right my post wasnt really relevant to the subjects original post. As a man who has been to prison I get touchy sometimes about accusations and such. I am sorry for getting on my soapbox.
    This Post Contains No Artificial Intelligence. It Contains No Human Intelligence Either.

  5. #20
    Extraordinary Member kjn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    4,875

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tbaron View Post
    Your right my post wasnt really relevant to the subjects original post. As a man who has been to prison I get touchy sometimes about accusations and such. I am sorry for getting on my soapbox.
    No problem, man. And we need to listen to and remember stories such as yours as well.

    It's just that we are currently—I hope—living through a huge realignment of power dynamics in our society. Those things are never easy, but they are necessary to make things better in the long term, no matter how painful they can be to live through.
    «Speaking generally, it is because of the desire of the tragic poets for the marvellous that so varied and inconsistent an account of Medea has been given out» (Diodorus Siculus, The Library of History [4.56.1])

  6. #21
    Boisterously Confused
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    9,449

    Default

    Are they gutless? Wanting to dodge what they think will be bad PR? Possibly.

    Are they principled? Declining to lend megaphone to somebody who might be highly sketchy? Bit less likely, but not impossible.

    Do either of those things make this censorship? Nah.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •