*Magnify*
    May     ►
SMTWTFS
      
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Archive RSS
SPONSORED LINKS
Creative fun in
the palm of your hand.
Printed from https://www.writing.com/main/books/action/view/entry_id/954329
Rated: 13+ · Book · Other · #1908951
Random thoughts, inconsistent posting
#954329 added March 14, 2019 at 1:43pm
Restrictions: None
Is there Freedom of Speech?

What a person posts on social media "usually" is something they aspire to. A political ideal, religious tenement, preference to anything. However, it has been stated, an employer or prospective employer may look at the social media and be opposed to that person's concept. If it doesn't fit their narrative, they don't hire them. When does this become prejudice? It's unlawful (in the USA) to discriminate when hiring or accepting applications for housing or even a service. Is that possible in this day an age? Its worse now than it ever was. In all my years(66) I've seen this being twisted and turned to fit whatever narrative is at the moment.

Politically it is at it's worst. One side points that they need freedom of speech. For years Universities demanded "safe places" and the freedom to spout their rhetoric. Now when the opposition returns with the same objective, they are beaten and harassed, their projects are thrown out. Why? Where is the freedom? Why can't everyone be free to state their ideas? Its what makes things grow. Dialogue important, opposite views are often melded into a new view with discussion.

I heard one of my favorite pod casts has been harassed. The host M Boudet posted a scathing recording of how he was harassed by two men and their band of people. I was appalled at the idea he was chastised for his freedom of speech.  Just a few minutes ago I went out to the "innerwebs" and looked up to see what the issue was. I'm surprised. 

I don't swear. I don't care to listen to pod casters who use F-bombs and other words through out their pod casts. I choose not to listen to them nor would I donate to them. One such couple have a great pod cast with lots of good content. I can't get through the fact they say F- repeatedly in their posts. I can find other content just as good without the extra words. Sometimes I hear the word or similar spoken every so often in a pod cast. I try to ignore it if the content is interesting. If the focus becomes more on the swearing than the content, I change.

I feel censoring is  mildly outdated. We really are past that era. I wish people were more professional in their speech, but pod casting seems to be like cable, anything goes. 

I was surprised to see this censorship of Boudet. If what they alleged is true, people have every right to not follow him and ban him from their social media accounts. Mr. Boudet might want to rethink his actions. Sometimes "just because you can, doesn't mean you should."

I'm going to take this a little further. Mr. Boudet has the right to say what he wants, respond to comments with derogatory remarks, and say anything he wants to under the law. He can spout religious or political rhetoric to his hearts content. People can choose to 1) not listen to his podcasts,2) ban him from posting on their own media page or 3) not support any company that supports him. It's a free country. His rant about being run off the air falls a little flat. Like a child eating a cookie and saying "It was there for me to eat, even though you told me not to. It's your fault for making them."

Our government right now is showing a remarkable twist of ideals. One one hand there is a growing ideal that all wearable items should not have ANY offensive writing on them. Yet there is not guidelines to what is offensive. It's strictly up to the person in charge. A teacher or principal can order a child to remove a shirt or hat they deem offensive if it doesn't match their personal belief. On the other hand if a child or parent tells the principal they are offended by something the teacher says or does, and it's acceptable to that principal they are ignored and nothing is done.

This ideal that only certain groups, tenements or doctrine is acceptable or not is a problem. It should be freedom for all. If a woman can wear a burka to congress, then a jew should be able to wear a yarmulkes or Yamakas. Or what if someone decided to wear a MAGA hat to congress one day?
What is offensive isn't a rule anymore. It is judged by who has the biggest voice, the longest stick or the most money.






© Copyright 2019 Quick-Quill (UN: thekindred at Writing.Com). All rights reserved.
Quick-Quill has granted Writing.Com, its affiliates and its syndicates non-exclusive rights to display this work.
Printed from https://www.writing.com/main/books/action/view/entry_id/954329