Now I'm prepare to be proved wrong, but my gut feeling is the people most against GB News will be those brought up in the more recent "offended" culture, and see it as normal to try to shut down different views. I'm from an age of vigorous debate, a bit like these forums, a good debate from both sides often reveals the truth. Sometimes you're right and other times you learn something you hadn't been aware of. Trying to "cancel" opposing views is incredibly dangerous. I like to hear other views to try and understand them, even if I think they are wrong or I don't like them. Not everyone is so reasonable!
*** GB News *** (stay on topic!)
- Thread starter Terminal_Boy
- Start date
- Status
It wasnt just one name though was it? It was a whole bunch of tweets back and forwards suggesting "appropriate" black baby names.
This kid isn't even black. That's the irony of it.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 5 Apr 2006
- Posts
- 7,704
Could you imagine having that same baby names conversation in the pub and someone overhearing it, then reporting it to that persons place of work?
Honestly in this day and age you would expect people involved in the media would know better that their job or employment may get impacted by what they post on social media.
In my day we just used to say it in the pub not publish it on twitter for the whole world to see.
Yes but these people are like woodworm. You don't see them normally, but now they have a way to poke their heads outside you can see how toxic and destructive they are and can be under the surface.
That's what I'm going to call such people from now on: woodworm.
Last edited:
I find modern day politics to be very adversarial and a bit worrying really - it's more important than ever to not get sucked in to a hole. When I was younger, nobody really cared how you voted, now people will basically poke you with a stick about it.
In my childhood, teens and early 20's You'd get the odd person slagging off Maggie Thatcher (later, Blair) or people talking about the latest goings on with the Shop Steward in the pub but that was it. I suppose there was a reason politics used to be quite a personal thing - talking about it at the dinner table was about as welcome as farting or peeing in the gravy.
I'm glad my social group are mature enough to not be at each other's throats over it given we're a pretty mixed bunch.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 5 Apr 2006
- Posts
- 7,704
Which people are the woodworm? the people that go out of their way to make someone else lose their job for saying something on twitter, that they wouldn't say in person.?
But is it more or less dangerous than a TV channel that bills itself as 'News', but is on a mission to rile up and and divide the population of the UK? If the channel was called 'GB Entertainment' then fair enough, but something like this just seems wrong to me. It's like when the Tory twitter account renamed itself 'FactCheck UK' during the election debates. It's deliberately mis-leading people.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 5 Apr 2006
- Posts
- 7,704
but is on a mission to rile up and and divide the population of the UK?...Isn't that what the BBC are doing though?
Racism everywhere, we can't move for the racism.
Racism everywhere, we can't move for the racism.
They do want to advertise but it's precisely because of cancel culture that they're now pulling advertising, companies are just as scared of being cancelled as people are which is why they too play along with the leftist/woke agenda.
Cancel culture is a kind word for it anyway, it's ultimately just censorship. Whether it's blocking funding, blocking services, shutting down speakers at universities, social media banning, suspending, shadow banning, de-monetising etc. It's all just aimed at blocking and suppressing voices they don't want the masses to hear.
If their ideology is so good they wouldn't need to shut down debate and competition.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 29,669
Aren't you always trying to cancel Hunter Biden for some reason?
Why are they trying to cancel a company's choice in where they advertise? Piers Morgan has gone off on one at IKEA today about it. Why is he so upset about where a homeware store chooses to have adverts?
The real reason for the butthurt surrounding this is simply because these people are upset that their views are not popular or in the majority.
If the viewpoints on these "news" stations was popular, companies wouldn't be pulling their ads. It really is that simple.
Some would argue the BBC News are just the same. I remember the BBC of the 70's, very different organisation, I used to be a big fan of them. All news organisations have leanings now, most don't even get their "News" first hand but though organisations like AFP and Reuters. I'm well aware there is bias out there, what worries me are the voices claiming that some news organisations are the bastions of truth and all good things. Critical thinking is a dying art. I see a lot of confusion between education, qualifications and intelligence, wisdom and thinking for oneself. Don't think for one second that the BBC aren't capable of misleading us, there are some very high profile examples of that. It shouldn't be about being tribal but sadly it always ends up there.
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Oct 2014
- Posts
- 1,773
Companies are scared and overestimate the value of opinion on twitter.
Just look at the election days ffs. #EveryoneIsVotingLabour
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 29,669
Many would argue that, in fact.
They are completely mistaken, but hey-ho
If people think BBC news is anywhere near as biased as 'GB News' has been, they need a reality check.
Received wisdom, at one time your sexuality would get you locked up. Who would have spoken up about that? Social pressure works, that's why it is used. At the moment GB News are going against the "narrative", is that wrong? Should they be silenced? If you threaten to take away money from a company of course they will buckle, doesn't mean it's right. Executives are also weak and worry about their jobs or answering to shareholders. If the tactics didn't work, right or wrong, they wouldn't be used or at least attempted. Gaslighting the affects of trying to organise mass boycotts from Twitter followers doesn't change the reality.
I'd agree with this. I've always been one for 'arguing' the opposing view in a discussion whether I agree with it or not. I don't necessarily mean that to be purposefully argumentative, but more to ensure that people consider the balance in their argument. As you say, there's a shift towards 'cancelling' alternative opinion on both sides. Left and Right wing people are just as bad as each other for it.
- Status