• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cancel culture IRL

Status
Not open for further replies.
d4m10n said:
Exactly.
Click to expand...

Sure, public universities hands are often very much tied on these issues.

At least they managed to drag this thing out and give their students a half-year reprieve from this odious freak. Hopefully he continues on his plans to retire soon.
 
d4m10n said:
I find the idea that including perceived origin in viral nomenclature went from ordinary academic usage to a fireable offense in less than two years, well, downright silly. Such dramatic overcorrection smacks of moral panic.
Click to expand...
He wasn't fired, he was suspended, so it doesn't seem that it is a fireable offense, at least not at Syracuse University.

I don't find it at all remarkable that publications from before the WHO's recommendation not to call it the Wuhan coronavirus called it the Wuhan coronavirus.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
Sure, public universities hands are often very much tied on these issues.

At least they managed to drag this thing out and give their students a half-year reprieve from this odious freak. Hopefully he continues on his plans to retire soon.
Click to expand...
Isn't Syracuse private? Or am I all wet?

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 
d4m10n said:
Not so careful that they'd avoid referencing and hosting papers which used "Wuhan coronavirus" in the title, e.g. https://www.who.int/docs/default-so...-assay-v1991527e5122341d99287a1b17c111902.pdf

I find the idea that including perceived origin in viral nomenclature went from ordinary academic usage to a fireable offense in less than two years, well, downright silly. Such dramatic overcorrection smacks of moral panic.
Click to expand...
Surely, referring to it as the Wuhan coronavirus in January 2020 is different than calling it the Wuhan Flu for many reasons.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
Yes, but I imagine like most private colleges they accept public funds, making the distinction not that important.
Click to expand...
I assume so too, but you used the phrase "public universities" which is evidently not what you meant.

Anyway, I'd say that taking public funds wouldn't make censorship a first amendment issue. Receiving public money doesn't make a university part of the government nor make the government responsible for all that the university does.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 
Emily's Cat said:
Are you channeling Torquemada?
Click to expand...

Assassin's Creed fan are you?

Free speech is not absolute [Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919)]. IMO, there are some things that are not up for debate as to whether they should be allowed to be promoted and promulgated under Free Speech doctrine.. racism, bigotry, Holocaust denial, genocide.

There is absolutely no justification for any of these - allowing the promotion of these things harms society as a whole. Yes, there will come the inevitable and interminable debates over the problematic issue of what should or should not be allowed as part of free speech, and that is hard, very ******* hard, but we should not be deterred from doing things that benefit society overall just because they are hard, and we do not have the courage to pursue them. As I said earlier, 16 counties in Europe plus Israel have managed to wrestle with this problem, made an exception to their Free Speech Doctrines, forbidding the promotion of Holocaust denial, and maging doing so a criminal offence.

In 2007, the EU approved legislation that makes denying the Holocaust punishable by jail sentences, and while it gives countries across the entire EU an option of not enforcing the law if such a prohibition does not exist in their own laws, it does permit those who do, to prosecute HD's from other countries who come across their borders. At the time their were howls of "OMG my freeze peach rites are being attacked" and "its the thin end of the wedge, what what will they ban next". Well, the answer to that is... nothing. It has been 14 years... and the sky has not caved in on the EU.
 
phiwum said:
Surely, referring to it as the Wuhan coronavirus in January 2020 is different than calling it the Wuhan Flu for many reasons.
Click to expand...
We don't have access to his reasons for using that language, only conjecture. Some are far too quick to shout "J'accuse!" and start sharpening le Rasoir National in the hope that heads will soon roll.
 
Last edited:
mumblethrax said:
Schenck is famously bad law, and has effectively been a dead letter in the US since the 60s.
Click to expand...

a. It is still precedent and has not been fully overturned by SCOTUS. It was partially set aside in Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969). However, you can, right now, literally still be prosecuted if you scream "fire" in a crowded theatre - 18 USC § 1038. You can get 5 years in the slammer just for doing it, but if anyone is injured or killed as a result of your false alarm, you can get up to 20 years!

b. There are other similar laws in other countries

c. Its just one example of free speech not being absolute - there are plenty of others in many countries - libel, slander, defamation, fraud, obscenity, threats, hate speech, child pornography, sedition, incitement, fighting words, classified information, copyright violation, racial vilification, trade secrets, food labelling, non-disclosure agreements, the right to privacy, dignity, the right to be forgotten, public security, and perjury.

NOTE: The items in red are not protected speech under the US First Amendment
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
a. It is still precedent and has not been fully overturned by SCOTUS.
Click to expand...
The test it developed has not been used in decades. It's been replaced by the Brandenburg test, under which racist speech (just to choose one of your examples) is clearly permissible in most circumstances.

c. Its just one example of free speech not being absolute
Click to expand...
That's not remotely controversial. But saying "free speech isn't absolute" doesn't actually do any work towards establishing that any given class of speech should be limited.
 
smartcooky said:
Assassin's Creed fan are you?
Click to expand...
No.

Also not a fan of intolerance and cruelty.

smartcooky said:
Free speech is not absolute [Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919)]. IMO, there are some things that are not up for debate as to whether they should be allowed to be promoted and promulgated under Free Speech doctrine.. racism, bigotry, Holocaust denial, genocide.
Click to expand...

For a REALLY long part of human history, atheism was in that list. In some parts of the world, it still is. As is homosexuality.

Advocating that some *ideas* justify violence in order to silence them is, and always will be, a hallmark of authoritarians and fascists.
 
mumblethrax said:
The test it developed has not been used in decades. It's been replaced by the Brandenburg test, under which racist speech (just to choose one of your examples) is clearly permissible in most circumstances.
Click to expand...

Not everything is about 'Murica

mumblethrax said:
That's not remotely controversial. But saying "free speech isn't absolute" doesn't actually do any work towards establishing that any given class of speech should be limited.
Click to expand...

You have to start somewhere
 
Emily's Cat said:
No.

Also not a fan of intolerance and cruelty.

For a REALLY long part of human history, atheism was in that list. In some parts of the world, it still is. As is homosexuality.

Advocating that some *ideas* justify violence in order to silence them is, and always will be, a hallmark of authoritarians and fascists.
Click to expand...

And?
 
mumblethrax said:
Your reason for bringing up Schenck is that not everything is about America? Ok.
Click to expand...

Oh FFS stop it! It was JUST AN EXAMPLE!

What part of "There are other similar laws in other countries" are you incapable of understanding?


mumblethrax said:
Ideally, you'd start somewhere that has a chance in hell of persuading anyone of anything.
Click to expand...

Yup, at the beginning, by acknowledging the need to do something
 
Last edited:
The FIRE next time

d4m10n said:
Exactly.
Click to expand...
It may be time for me to hit FIRE's tip jar again. Syracuse's overall record is poor, but for me one of the more astonishing incidents was when members of the engineering fraternity Theta Tau were punished for putting on a stupid skit for a private audience on their own property.
EDT
Syracuse University is private, but it used to have Freedom of Speech in 8 foot high letters on one of its buildings.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom