Cancel Culture

[Gnasher]

 

 

 

 

 

[Kevin D]

 

[Kevin D]

 

[Strontium]

RIP to the bangs in Christmas crackers

 

[VladimirIlyich]

On 10/11/2023 at 16:04, TheHowieLama said:

 

Do you think Sunal wears lifts?

 

 

Combined with a voice for Twitter.

I have no idea who Sunal is or what lifts are,unless he wears actual elevators?

[AngryOfTuebrook]

 

 

[Kevin D]

https://novaramedia.com/2024/01/15/mehdi-hasans-exit-from-msnbc-is-an-embarrassment-to-us-journalism/
 

Nobody is better at interviewing America’s most powerful public figures than Mehdi Hasan. To watch the MSNBC host interrogate people like John Bolton, Erik Prince and Vivek Ramaswamywas to witness a masterclass in political accountability. Hasan typically comes armed with documents, meaning that if an interviewee contradicts a claim they made previously or offers an evasive non-answer, they can expect to be called out on it. 

 

 

This style of adversarial journalism, more common in Hasan’s native Britain than in the US, is crucial for a functional democratic society because it ensures politicians’ lies are actually exposed. Precisely because it is effective, confrontational journalism is intolerable to the political establishment, which tries to eliminate it at all costs – hence Hasan’s departure from MSNBC, announced on Tuesday.

 

To the extent that MSNBC aspires to be a serious journalistic organisation, then, Hasan was a major asset to the network. But on his MSNBC show, Hasan applied his critical style to the government of Israel as it continues its assault on Gaza. His viral interview with former Israeli ambassador to the UK Mark Regev included a jaw-dropping moment in which Regev refused to accept that Israel had killed any children in Gaza (Doctors Without Borders estimates that over 100 children a day are being killed). Hasan’s scepticism of Israel, and the Biden administration’s support for Israeli policies, was apparently too much for the network, which cancelled Hasan’s show in early December (Hasan was initially announced to be staying on as a contributor, but ultimately quit the network entirely, in circumstances that have not been made fully clear).

 

Media suppression of dissident voices in times of war is not new. During the Iraq war in 2003, MSNBC fired Phil Donahue, who was thought to be too much of an anti-war voice. The US media failed spectacularly in that war to interrogate US government claims, resulting in the public supporting an invasion based on flimsy falsehoods. The Iraq episode demonstrated conclusively why journalism needs to antagonise governments, and why having journalists like Hasan who ask tough questions is necessary to protect the population from being deceived.

 

Critics of Israel in particular are often censored or marginalised within US political discourse. Since the 7 October attacks, and Israel’s much deadlier retaliatory attack on Gaza, Palestinian cultural events have been cancelled and the country’s only Palestinian American congresswoman has been formally censured. Human Rights Watch reports that Meta has “been silencing voices in support of Palestine and Palestinian human rights on Instagram and Facebook in a wave of heightened censorship of social media.” Threats to pro-Palestinian speech are escalating; recently, a Wall Street Journal op-ed called for pro-ceasefire protests to be labelled “domestic terrorists” for blocking traffic.

 

Even liberal outlets are often skittish when it comes to criticism of Israel. I know this from personal experience, having been fired as a columnist for a liberal newspaper after a single tweet critical of US military aid to Israel. Marc Lamont Hill was similarly ditched by CNN after calling for a free Palestine (in the bizarre world of pro-Israel discourse, calling for a free Palestine is treated as a coded “call for genocide”). Hill has co-authored a useful book on how many US liberals are “progressive except for Palestine”.

 

Nobody has argued that Mehdi Hasan got anything wrong factually, or did bad work. In fact, he was probably one of the more scrupulous researchers in American journalism. But the heads of giant corporations don’t have to give justifications for their decisions. Hasan was controversial, and so his show was ended.

 

Hasan’s final show poignantly “featured an interview with Motaz Azaiza, a Palestinian photographer who talked about the danger of working in Gaza during Israeli military operations”. Hasan paid tribute to the large number of his fellow journalists killed in the Israeli assault. This kind of solidarity among journalists has been notably absent from the response to Hasan’s ousting. The Washington Post’s Perry Bacon Jr penned a column accusing the MSNBC brass of “pushing the network in the direction of being the television arm of the Democratic Party leadership”, while representatives Ilhan Omar and Ro Khanna criticised the network’s decision to cancel Hasan’s show. But for the most part, Hasan’s departure has been met with silence.

 

This is shameful. American journalists should be united in defending one of their own and in protecting dissident voices. Otherwise, they risk reinforcing the perception that the media is little more than an elite propaganda apparatus designed to manufacture consent. It’s worth reflecting on what we lose by the departure of Hasan from MSNBC. Think of the interviews that won’t be done, the questions that won’t be asked, the lies that will go unchallenged. Hasan’s work was important. It needed to be done. He’s also not the only one being punished.

 

By effectively hounding him out, MSNBC has put everyone else at the network on notice that they too need to watch themselves if they want a career there. Journalists will inevitably be more likely to self-censor, to ask themselves before saying anything about Israel or Palestine whether it’s likely to get them into trouble. That is an Orwellian environment in which independent critical thought cannot possibly flourish. Hasan’s exit from MSNBC is no small incident. It is an embarrassing chapter in the history of US journalism, and everyone who believes in the importance of a free press should unite opposing it.

 

Nathan J Robinson is the editor-in-chief of Current Affairs.

 

[VladimirIlyich]

On 30/12/2023 at 00:34, AngryOfTuebrook said:

 

 

Is he a right wing prick?

[TheHowieLama]

Doesn't anybody do milkshakes anymore?

[Mudface]

1 hour ago, VladimirIlyich said:

Is he a right wing prick?

 

Don't think so, he used to have a fair go at Trump on Twitter. He supports Israel though, so he's obviously 'problematic' now, if not downright evil.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12402545/Michael-Rapaport-Instagram-false-information-Donald-Trump.html

 

https://www.jpost.com/j-spot/article-781532

[VladimirIlyich]

30 minutes ago, Mudface said:

 

Don't think so, he used to have a fair go at Trump on Twitter. He supports Israel though, so he's obviously 'problematic' now, if not downright evil.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12402545/Michael-Rapaport-Instagram-false-information-Donald-Trump.html

 

https://www.jpost.com/j-spot/article-781532

He sounds a bit of a big mouth more than anything.

[Mudface]

58 minutes ago, VladimirIlyich said:

He sounds a bit of a big mouth more than anything.

 

C list actor using social media to raise his profile.

[Gnasher]

2 hours ago, Mudface said:

 

Don't think so, he used to have a fair go at Trump on Twitter. He supports Israel though, so he's obviously 'problematic' now, if not downright evil.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12402545/Michael-Rapaport-Instagram-false-information-Donald-Trump.html

 

https://www.jpost.com/j-spot/article-781532

 

Fuck off. 

[Gnasher]

2 hours ago, Mudface said:

 

Don't think so, he used to have a fair go at Trump on Twitter. He supports Israel though, so he's obviously 'problematic' now, if not downright evil.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12402545/Michael-Rapaport-Instagram-false-information-Donald-Trump.html

 

https://www.jpost.com/j-spot/article-781532

 

"He supports Israel though so he must be evil"

 

This Genocide is certainly flushing them out. Mugface just the latest.

 

 

 

Yeah man.

 

[Gnasher]

5 hours ago, Mudface said:

 

Don't think so, he used to have a fair go at Trump on Twitter. He supports Israel though, so he's obviously 'problematic' now, if not downright evil.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12402545/Michael-Rapaport-Instagram-false-information-Donald-Trump.html

 

https://www.jpost.com/j-spot/article-781532

 

Why would supporting Israel be seen by some to be a bit of a negative 'Mudface" ? What's happened to make some feel that way? Any ideas?

 

You seem to think the problem lies with them that call out the wrong they see. Wonder why that is. Why the snigger?

[Section_31]

Nurse!

[Gnasher]

11 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

Nurse!

 

Err you've made a big stupid song and dance about putting me on ignore these past few days so unless you've developed supernatural powers then maybe it's you who needs a nurse. 

 

Or were you just bullshiting again?

[Kepler-186]

Remember. No Russian. 

[Bjornebye]

3 hours ago, Gnasher said:

 

"He supports Israel though so he must be evil"

 

This Genocide is certainly flushing them out. Mugface just the latest.

 

 

 

Yeah man.

 

 

If you click on that link someone's responded with a video of air strikes hitting Gaza and he just replies "Good" despite the civilian casualties mounting up. He's a horrible racist zionist twat. I bet he faked the snowball video and all, lying is a zionist trait. If only it was a fucking house brick. 

[polymerpunkah]

Right-wing pundit and former book-ban-supporter Bill O'Reilly hoist with his own petard:

 

https://pen.org/conservative-commentator-bill-oreilly-hits-the-roof-over-his-books-being-banned-in-florida/

 

 

[Mudface]

59 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

 

If you click on that link someone's responded with a video of air strikes hitting Gaza and he just replies "Good" despite the civilian casualties mounting up. He's a horrible racist zionist twat. I bet he faked the snowball video and all, lying is a zionist trait. If only it was a fucking house brick. 

 

Quite. Not sure why Gnasher's in a tizzy, apart from him being a thick cunt who doesn't understand what he's reading.

 

Rapaport was flavour of the month with 'leftist, lib' Twitter when he was railing against Trump. He certainly won't be now, he's a milkshake duck.

 

Not that his opinion on anything matters a fuck anyway, he's a jobbing actor with a big mouth and a middling social media presence, that's all. I suppose if you're glued to some Twitter echo chamber then he might seem important, in the grand scheme of things he really isn't.

[Gnasher]

29 minutes ago, Mudface said:

 

Quite. Not sure why Gnasher's in a tizzy, apart from him being a thick cunt who doesn't understand what he's reading.

 

Rapaport was flavour of the month with 'leftist, lib' Twitter when he was railing against Trump. He certainly won't be now, he's a milkshake duck.

 

Not that his opinion on anything matters a fuck anyway, he's a jobbing actor with a big mouth and a middling social media presence, that's all. I suppose if you're glued to some Twitter echo chamber then he might seem important, in the grand scheme of things he really isn't.

 

Another bullshiting blert who pretends I'm on ignore. 'Mudface' I can read through cunts like you Mugface. Don't you worry. 

 

Seems the people who complain about twitter know more about the goons who are on it than those they chastise. 

 

[VladimirIlyich]

It seems you may need to leave that Twitter place and give your head a shake Mr Gnasher as I'm not sure what you are railing against here. 

[Strontium]

Same shit he's ranting on about in every other fucking thread.

[Section_31]

1 hour ago, polymerpunkah said:

Right-wing pundit and former book-ban-supporter Bill O'Reilly hoist with his own petard:

 

https://pen.org/conservative-commentator-bill-oreilly-hits-the-roof-over-his-books-being-banned-in-florida/

 

 

 

Banning books, what a time to be alive.