That Linehan *censored* again.

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people
User avatar
El Pollo Diablo
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3323
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 pm
Location: FBPE

Re: That Linehan *censored* again.

Post by El Pollo Diablo » Wed Mar 10, 2021 9:10 am

The absolutely delightful and not at all fundamentally bigoted Helen Staniland has got not at all over the top about her ban from twitter:
“I am banned from the public square for the rest of my life,” she told the panel as she called for greater transparency regarding Twitter’s moderation.
That's right, everyone - twitter literally is the public square. All the television companies, newspapers, other social media sites, media websites and actual physical public squares should just pack up and go home. Twitter is all there is.
If truth is many-sided, mendacity is many-tongued

Bewildered
Fuzzable
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: That Linehan *censored* again.

Post by Bewildered » Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:49 am

El Pollo Diablo wrote:
Wed Mar 10, 2021 9:10 am
The absolutely delightful and not at all fundamentally bigoted Helen Staniland has got not at all over the top about her ban from twitter:
“I am banned from the public square for the rest of my life,” she told the panel as she called for greater transparency regarding Twitter’s moderation.
That's right, everyone - twitter literally is the public square. All the television companies, newspapers, other social media sites, media websites and actual physical public squares should just pack up and go home. Twitter is all there is.
What does she mean by public square actually - is it the same as saying the public sphere, ie she has been denied from all public space? If so I agree that’s a silly exaggeration, but it’s not clear to me just looking at that quote.

I don’t know who she is or what she has said beyond that quote. However when the problem that people from certain minority groups and particularly, I think, women were being harassed on Twitter came to light, some people said they could just use other platforms etc and it didn’t matter. In response it was rightly pointed out that (amongst other things) being on Twitter is an essential part of some jobs and being locked out of Twitter can impact in many different ways. That point is true and swings both ways, ie it applies to both people being intimidated from it because of the toxic environment and people be banned from it.

I don’t think removing someone from Twitter is denying free speech, but I equally don’t think it is trivial and should be whatever goes or people are being silly to be concerned about it. I think exactly how to regard these things and how they should be handled is complicated. I was quite interested in stories about the Facebook oversight board, not sure what to make of it.

*checks thread title - feel free to split this off if you like, having a thread to discuss restrictions of speech on Twitter / Facebook without it being tied to some specific bigotry, person or issue might be nice.

User avatar
Tessa K
Light of Blast
Posts: 4707
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 5:07 pm
Location: Closer than you'd like

Re: That Linehan *censored* again.

Post by Tessa K » Wed Mar 10, 2021 1:17 pm

Some people confuse free speech with hate speech. And some confuse the right to speak their minds with the right not to be challenged or held to account. Look at Piers Morgan on Good Morning Britain. His co-presenter disagreed with his opinion of Meghan Markle, he had a hissy fit and stormed off, possibly never to return. This isn't the place to get into the rights and wrongs of what PM said but, like Linehan, he doesn't care about the consequences of sounding off, the impact that will have on other people's lives.

User avatar
TopBadger
Catbabel
Posts: 782
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 6:33 pm
Location: Halfway up

Re: That Linehan *censored* again.

Post by TopBadger » Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:47 pm

jdc wrote:
Tue Mar 09, 2021 7:39 pm
Grumble wrote:
Tue Mar 09, 2021 7:08 pm
Last time I checked on All4 The IT Crowd was still there, next to Father Ted. What does he mean it’s been taken off Channel 4?
I've investigated this and s3e4 is missing, which is the one where "Douglas finds the love of his life in a journalist named April, but mishears that she used to be a man, thinking she said that she is from Iran."
That was a cracking episode... explains why I couldnt find it some time ago. Didnt occur to me that it had been pulled.
You can't polish a turd...
unless its Lion or Osterich poo... http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/mythbus ... -turd.html

tom p
After Pie
Posts: 1876
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: That Linehan *censored* again.

Post by tom p » Thu Mar 11, 2021 12:41 pm

TopBadger wrote:
Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:47 pm
jdc wrote:
Tue Mar 09, 2021 7:39 pm
Grumble wrote:
Tue Mar 09, 2021 7:08 pm
Last time I checked on All4 The IT Crowd was still there, next to Father Ted. What does he mean it’s been taken off Channel 4?
I've investigated this and s3e4 is missing, which is the one where "Douglas finds the love of his life in a journalist named April, but mishears that she used to be a man, thinking she said that she is from Iran."
That was a cracking episode... explains why I couldnt find it some time ago. Didnt occur to me that it had been pulled.
It was still up a few months ago - my daughters just got into the IT crowd around Q2 last year when my wife was very ill with COVID & I remember them watching that episode.
The main joke was that the audience expects Douglas to be appalled when he finds out he had misheard, but he doesn't care. There's nothing remotely transphobic in it at all. I can understand why Linehan was miffed it had been pulled (but cannot understand his reaction, which was 100% unacceptable).

User avatar
Tessa K
Light of Blast
Posts: 4707
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 5:07 pm
Location: Closer than you'd like

Re: That Linehan *censored* again.

Post by Tessa K » Thu Mar 11, 2021 12:55 pm

tom p wrote:
Thu Mar 11, 2021 12:41 pm
TopBadger wrote:
Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:47 pm
jdc wrote:
Tue Mar 09, 2021 7:39 pm


I've investigated this and s3e4 is missing, which is the one where "Douglas finds the love of his life in a journalist named April, but mishears that she used to be a man, thinking she said that she is from Iran."
That was a cracking episode... explains why I couldnt find it some time ago. Didnt occur to me that it had been pulled.
It was still up a few months ago - my daughters just got into the IT crowd around Q2 last year when my wife was very ill with COVID & I remember them watching that episode.
The main joke was that the audience expects Douglas to be appalled when he finds out he had misheard, but he doesn't care. There's nothing remotely transphobic in it at all. I can understand why Linehan was miffed it had been pulled (but cannot understand his reaction, which was 100% unacceptable).
This is the scene where she tells him https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2KsZHRrFpU

and this is where it comes up again and they fight https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3BY72RF8vc

Bewildered
Fuzzable
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: That Linehan *censored* again.

Post by Bewildered » Thu Mar 11, 2021 1:53 pm

tom p wrote:
Thu Mar 11, 2021 12:41 pm
TopBadger wrote:
Wed Mar 10, 2021 10:47 pm
jdc wrote:
Tue Mar 09, 2021 7:39 pm


I've investigated this and s3e4 is missing, which is the one where "Douglas finds the love of his life in a journalist named April, but mishears that she used to be a man, thinking she said that she is from Iran."
That was a cracking episode... explains why I couldnt find it some time ago. Didnt occur to me that it had been pulled.
It was still up a few months ago - my daughters just got into the IT crowd around Q2 last year when my wife was very ill with COVID & I remember them watching that episode.
The main joke was that the audience expects Douglas to be appalled when he finds out he had misheard, but he doesn't care. There's nothing remotely transphobic in it at all. I can understand why Linehan was miffed it had been pulled (but cannot understand his reaction, which was 100% unacceptable).
Just my take, but I just watched the whole episode again and it doesn’t match your description.

For me it was surprising because I have seen it before, I think if you asked me my favourite IT crowd episode I could have said the one where they convince Jen they have given her the internet, *but* I didn’t remember the trans storyline at all and only small parts rang a bell when rewatching. I guess it’s obvious I was not outraged when I saw it previously and saw nothing remarkable about that part.

However to me now the humour is mocking and insulting towards transpeople. After she tells him the first time and we don’t know he misheard there is indeed some humour which comes from the expectation that Douglas woukd have a problem with it because he is hardly a reconstructed man and that’s all fine, the joke is about our expectations of him. But then there’s a bunch of gags where they are having fun together, where they are doing stereotypically “bloke things” and she behaves like a bloke, ie the idea is she looks like a woman but she is actually just a man. Also when they break up they have a big fight (presumably the scene linked by tessa below) that ends with her having gotten beaten. I think that’s meant to be funny because she is fighting like a man.

Douglas clearly does have a problem with the fact that she was a man after it’s revealed he misheard her and that is why he splits up with her and then makes himself miserable.


On the other hand it does seem sympathetic towards her and I do take the message at the end as being that he would have happier accepting her for who she is and not splitting up with her,

Bewildered
Fuzzable
Posts: 257
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 2:51 pm

Re: That Linehan *censored* again.

Post by Bewildered » Thu Mar 11, 2021 2:05 pm

Tessa K wrote:
Wed Mar 10, 2021 1:17 pm
Some people confuse free speech with hate speech. And some confuse the right to speak their minds with the right not to be challenged or held to account. Look at Piers Morgan on Good Morning Britain. His co-presenter disagreed with his opinion of Meghan Markle, he had a hissy fit and stormed off, possibly never to return. This isn't the place to get into the rights and wrongs of what PM said but, like Linehan, he doesn't care about the consequences of sounding off, the impact that will have on other people's lives.
Regarding the first sentence, not sure what you mean to be honest. Maybe you are defining free speech in a particular way or referring to specific free speech legislation or norms?

But it sounds a bit like a simplistic way for someone to dismiss a viewpoint they dislike. You may believe in relatively free speech, but think hate speech is too extreme to allow. But hate speech laws are a reduction in the level of free speech we have. As are laws against incitement to violence and as are laws against shouting fire in a crowded room. It should be possible to argue in favour of these restrictions without pretending there is no conflict with free speech.

User avatar
Tessa K
Light of Blast
Posts: 4707
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 5:07 pm
Location: Closer than you'd like

Re: That Linehan *censored* again.

Post by Tessa K » Thu Mar 11, 2021 3:22 pm

Bewildered wrote:
Thu Mar 11, 2021 2:05 pm
Tessa K wrote:
Wed Mar 10, 2021 1:17 pm
Some people confuse free speech with hate speech. And some confuse the right to speak their minds with the right not to be challenged or held to account. Look at Piers Morgan on Good Morning Britain. His co-presenter disagreed with his opinion of Meghan Markle, he had a hissy fit and stormed off, possibly never to return. This isn't the place to get into the rights and wrongs of what PM said but, like Linehan, he doesn't care about the consequences of sounding off, the impact that will have on other people's lives.
Regarding the first sentence, not sure what you mean to be honest. Maybe you are defining free speech in a particular way or referring to specific free speech legislation or norms?

But it sounds a bit like a simplistic way for someone to dismiss a viewpoint they dislike. You may believe in relatively free speech, but think hate speech is too extreme to allow. But hate speech laws are a reduction in the level of free speech we have. As are laws against incitement to violence and as are laws against shouting fire in a crowded room. It should be possible to argue in favour of these restrictions without pretending there is no conflict with free speech.
I meant that some people think it's their right to use hate speech with impunity whatever the law says. Yes of course freedom of expression comes with caveats for the wellbeing of most of us which some people might see as conflict, others would see as safeguards.

tom p
After Pie
Posts: 1876
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: That Linehan *censored* again.

Post by tom p » Thu Mar 11, 2021 4:10 pm

you're right I'd misremembered.
Thanks for the links and précis tessa & bewildered

User avatar
Little waster
After Pie
Posts: 2385
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 12:35 am
Location: About 1 inch behind my eyes

Re: That Linehan *censored* again.

Post by Little waster » Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:32 pm

El Pollo Diablo wrote:
Wed Mar 10, 2021 9:10 am

That's right, everyone - twitter literally is the public square.
They even get this bit fundamentally wrong.

Twitter isn't public it is quite clearly a commercial space and therefore you have no more of an inherent right to say what you like on Twitter without being kicked off it then you have an inherent right to scream abuse in the face of a customer in Wetherspoon's and not expect to get removed, forcibly even, by the management (and likely banned from every other pub in the area on general principles).
This place is not a place of honor, no highly esteemed deed is commemorated here, nothing valued is here.
What is here was dangerous and repulsive to us.
This place is best shunned and left uninhabited.

User avatar
Tessa K
Light of Blast
Posts: 4707
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 5:07 pm
Location: Closer than you'd like

Re: That Linehan *censored* again.

Post by Tessa K » Fri Mar 12, 2021 3:31 pm

The disgraced comedy writer was invited to speak with the Communications and Digital Committee on Tuesday (9 March) regarding social media conduct policies. Linehan ... was repeatedly reined in by peers as he derailed the discussion with 'gender critical issues'. ... “With respect, this is an inquiry into freedom of expression online, and that’s what I now want to return to,” replied Lord Gilbert of Panteg, the committee’s chair. ... Linehan, however, veered off once more to discuss “biological facts” and sex-based rights. He was again asked to return to the topic at hand.
https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2021/03/09/g ... k-rowling/
FATHER Ted creator Graham Linehan has revealed sudden financial insecurity from his stance on transgender rights caused so much strain that his marriage broke down. ... The comedy writer told the Communications and Digital Committee that engaging in “the fashionable American orthodoxy of gender identity ideology” led to the split from his wife after work dried up.
https://www.thesun.ie/news/6685262/grah ... -of-lords/

User avatar
Bird on a Fire
Princess POW
Posts: 10137
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
Location: Portugal

Re: That Linehan *censored* again.

Post by Bird on a Fire » Sat Mar 13, 2021 12:21 am

Little waster wrote:
Thu Mar 11, 2021 8:32 pm
El Pollo Diablo wrote:
Wed Mar 10, 2021 9:10 am

That's right, everyone - twitter literally is the public square.
They even get this bit fundamentally wrong.

Twitter isn't public it is quite clearly a commercial space and therefore you have no more of an inherent right to say what you like on Twitter without being kicked off it then you have an inherent right to scream abuse in the face of a customer in Wetherspoon's and not expect to get removed, forcibly even, by the management (and likely banned from every other pub in the area on general principles).
I mean, you can't actually do whatever you like in a public square anyway.

I think the difference is that a public square draws a large proportion of people in its catchment area, whereas hardly anyone uses twitter. Unless your particular target audience is hugely twitterised, being banned from it doesn't actually matter much in practice.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.

Post Reply