[Jamie89]

Originally Posted by Alf

So it's her freedom of speech that was the crime?

Still 1984 whichever way you look at it.

There hasn't been any crime, her freedom of speech is still intact. But her employers don't want their reputation brought down through association of someone who sends out racist tweets, that's their right. Shouldn't they be entitled to it?

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Alf

So it's her freedom of speech that was the crime?

Still 1984 whichever way you look at it.

Originally Posted by Jamie89

There hasn't been any crime, her freedom of speech is still intact. But her employers don't want their reputation brought down through association of someone who sends out racist tweets, that's their right. Shouldn't they be entitled to it?

Just as Jamie says alf; the government and law enforcement have no involvement here. She worked for a private production company, airing a show on a privately owned channel, and her employers decided to fire her for what she said, because they felt that she was damaging to their image and would therefore cost them money long term (no matter how successful her own show was).

That's pure unbridled capitalism right there. 1984 is about "Big Government". In this case actually if there WERE laws in place to protect her from her employers, that would represent more government involvement than what there has been here (i.e. None, it was again, a private financial decision)

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Just as Jamie says alf; the government and law enforcement have no involvement here. She worked for a private production company, airing a show on a privately owned channel, and her employers decided to fire her for what she said, because they felt that she was damaging to their image and would therefore cost them money long term (no matter how successful her own show was).

That's pure unbridled capitalism right there. 1984 is about "Big Government". In this case actually if there WERE laws in place to protect her from her employers, that would represent more government involvement than what there has been here (i.e. None, it was again, a private financial decision)

Yeah this is true.Even if it wasn’t racist as she says.If it even appears as if it could be then it can harm the TV company.
Same with the NFL handing out fines to players protesting the national anthem.
If it’s damaging the company image and losing them money in the long run then they’re gonna act.Like you say the US is’nt a communist society and is a free market.
People in the public eye,Specially older people are still getting used to social media and don’t realise that they’re representing the business they work for.
Not to mention the medication and alcohol in her at the time.
I think she probably needs to get off Twitter if her judgement gets that impaired.

[Alf]

Originally Posted by Jamie89

There hasn't been any crime, her freedom of speech is still intact. But her employers don't want their reputation brought down through association of someone who sends out racist tweets, that's their right. Shouldn't they be entitled to it?

Why was it racist? I've seen many people being likened to look like animals, I've never thought it racist. Unless you're saying non White people should be excluded from being the butt of a joke? I find that racist, so what are we going to do about that?

Of course her free speech is not incact, she's been fired from her job for it. I wouldn't want to be fired for that, so I don't agree with Rosanne having it happen to her.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Alf

Of course her free speech is not incact, she's been fired from her job for it. I wouldn't want to be fired for that, so I don't agree with Rosanne having it happen to her.

She was fired by a private company, no involvement from the authorities. That's part of American freedom, too. Freedom to do whatever you want with your company. Why are you so against that when you believe so adamantly in free speech?

You don't have to agree with it, or like it, no one does... It's their company / TV channel and they can do whatever they want with it .

[Alf]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

She was fired by a private company, no involvement from the authorities. That's part of American freedom, too. Freedom to do whatever you want with your company. Why are you so against that when you believe so adamantly in free speech?

You don't have to agree with it, or like it, no one does... It's their company / TV channel and they can do whatever they want with it .

They are, but their reasons for firing her are political.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Alf

They are, but their reasons for firing her are political.

The reasons that it would cost them money are political. Their reasons for firing her are financial.

[Alf]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

The reasons that it would cost them money are political. Their reasons for firing her are financial.

That's fair enough, but I personally don't believe that.

Rosanne is the title character and this show is over without her, not to mention her fans who wouldn't want to watch it without her. So if it's true, then their financial adviser has dropped a bollock.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Alf

That's fair enough, but I personally don't believe that.

Rosanne is the title character and this show is over without her, not to mention her fans who wouldn't want to watch it without her. So if it's true, then their financial adviser has dropped a bollock.

One show - even a show with a huge viewership - isn't enough to risk things like people boycotting the channel en masse, or more likely (and even worse for them), people boycotting the companies that advertise on the channel which will lead to them pulling their ads... And ads are all that matter to commercial channels. Without ad revenue, they're done.

Which is what I'd say about the above as well Maru; I don't think companies are necessarily "left leaning", it's all showmanship, all they really care about at the end of the day is sales and profit and thus they are terrified of boycotts. I mean just look at Starbucks recently... Scrabbling to "not seem like the bad guy" to appease their customers, but not because they actually care about anything that has happened, because they're feeling it in their pocket.

But again, that's the double edged sword... That is the other side of freedom / free speech / the free market. Yes you have the political freedom to say whatever you want, but because everyone ELSE has the same freedom, you can quickly find yourself (or your brand) "cancelled" for it. Faster than ever in the social media generation. And as you say... Broadcast media is an industry that's already under threat, with the best content slowly but surely transitioning to subscription based, streamed media.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Alf

They are, but their reasons for firing her are political.

While I agree with you, the mainstream media is fighting to remain relevant and so they sort of have to play along with the mob to appear otherwise. Every ounce of negative energy surrounding their brand counts, can mean losing a viewer, can mean losing lucrative sponsors, the decline of retail, could mean also pushing more eyeballs to "replace" broadcast media with streaming media in the online space ... if they were powerful enough, they could probably have taken the hit easily and barely noticed it. However, we're not in those times anymore... there are threats to broadcast coming from all directions. Companies have to respond now when there is negative pressure given the slow decline of brand power (in general) & festering political atmosphere... many of the big companies that are thriving now lean left... so could also be those sponsors calling them up and instructing them to make that move.

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Alf

Why was it racist? I've seen many people being likened to look like animals, I've never thought it racist. Unless you're saying non White people should be excluded from being the butt of a joke? I find that racist, so what are we going to do about that?

Of course her free speech is not incact, she's been fired from her job for it. I wouldn't want to be fired for that, so I don't agree with Rosanne having it happen to her.

And there is no historical context for likening black people to apes and monkeys?

[Alf]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

And there is no historical context for likening black people to apes and monkeys?

There's historical context for a lot of things, but we don't live in history, we evolved and humour was a big part of evolving. Embrace it.

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Alf

There's historical context for a lot of things, but we don't live in history, we evolved and humour was a big part of evolving. Embrace it.

We have moved on; calling a woman of colour the child of an ape and the muslim brotherhood is not something that would enter most of our thoughts. That's progress from where we were half a century ago.

Racism is still alive and well, as we've seen from these tweets. It's not really any hardship to me personally to go through my daily life without either likening a black woman to an ape, or finding it humourous to liken a black woman to an ape.

[Jamie89]

Originally Posted by Alf

Why was it racist? I've seen many people being likened to look like animals, I've never thought it racist. Unless you're saying non White people should be excluded from being the butt of a joke? I find that racist, so what are we going to do about that?

Of course her free speech is not incact, she's been fired from her job for it. I wouldn't want to be fired for that, so I don't agree with Rosanne having it happen to her.

Yeah but it's about context as well though, like Slim said the historical context of comparing black people to apes is just something everyone knows about. She could be ignorant to it I suppose, but I find that incredibly hard to believe. Or she just doesn't care about it, but then her lack of caring doesn't suddenly stop it from being racially offensive. And again, noone is accusing her of committing a crime, freedom of speech is about freedom of speech under the law. When you work for a company you're representing them and they have the right to protect their image. I used to work for a bank and was told I could lose my job if I ever got really drunk on a night out and made a fool of myself in front of people who knew where I worked I wouldn't want to be fired for that, but that's just business, it has nothing to do with law or rights being violated.

[lime]

Originally Posted by Alf

Why was it racist? I've seen many people being likened to look like animals, I've never thought it racist. Unless you're saying non White people should be excluded from being the butt of a joke? I find that racist, so what are we going to do about that?

Of course her free speech is not incact, she's been fired from her job for it. I wouldn't want to be fired for that, so I don't agree with Rosanne having it happen to her.

Alf you seem to be a bright lad so I refuse to belive that you don't get referining to a black person as an ape is racist......even now amongst us Afrikaaners..we refer to them as Baboons,monkeys,...and Kaffirs.(when I say we I mean it's some of my people not me)

To express shock horror and some being critized for reffering to black people as apes is either niave or something else...really hope you are naive

[Alf]

Originally Posted by lime

Alf you seem to be a bright lad so I refuse to belive that you don't get referining to a black person as an ape is racist......even now amongst us Afrikaaners..we refer to them as Baboons,monkeys,...and Kaffirs.(when I say we I mean it's some of my people not me)

To express shock horror and some being critized for reffering to black people as apes is either niave or something else...really hope you are naive

Darwin referred to all of us as apes, I don't think that was racist.

Rosanne didn't refer to the woman as an ape, she thought she was a lookalike of that perticular ape in the picture she posted.

I've just googled the words "people who look like animals" pictures that came up included both White and Black people that look like animals, and I'm fairly certain the World didn't end because of this.

She's a comedian and what she did was in no way meant with racist intent in my opinion.

[lime]

Originally Posted by Alf

Darwin referred to all of us as apes, I don't think that was racist.

Rosanne didn't refer to the woman as an ape, she thought she was a lookalike of that perticular ape in the picture she posted.

I've just googled the words "people who look like animals" pictures that came up included both White and Black people that look like animals, and I'm fairly certain the World didn't end because of this.

She's a comedian and what she did was in no way meant with racist intent in my opinion.

darwin was referring to evolution ...FFs lets be real here..Roseanne Barr was not refering to evolution...She is comparing black people to Ape's...that is a well racist slur against black people no matter what part of the globe you come from

You mentioned earlier that you don't see being compared to an an animal is racist....As a 45yr old woman you can call me a pig...cow which I would take as an attempt to insult me..or even call me a feckless ****...all personal insult's ..not racial....Also Alf she has form in this behaviour...She has said that the Irish are Anti smite and should give Ireland back to the British...


I really think she is a troubled woman and hope she has at least a few good people around her

[Maru]

Posting this for Alf

Who Cares If Democrats Call You Racist?

Two things can be true at once. Roseanne’s now infamous Valerie Jarrett joke was in poor taste, mean, and unfunny — hence her immediate and repeated apologies. Also, the popular furor to fire her along with the hundreds of crewmembers, actors, directors, and producers who worked for her is mostly motivated by the Left’s hysterical contempt for anyone even vaguely supportive of President Trump. How else to explain the sudden cancellation of Tim Allen’s hit, conservative show Last Man Standing or MSNBC’s continued employment of Joy Reid, who used her blog to spread offensive accusations about whole groups of people, including the smear that gay men categorically prey on young teenage boys?

I tweeted this simple observation in the wake of Roseann’e firing, which was too much for some conservatives. They warned me that anything but a loud and uniform condemnation of Roseanne Barr would give Democrats the opportunity to call conservatives racist — as if Democrat activists haven't already belched that smear at every Republican candidate in modern political history.

But I don’t judge people categorically for their race, and I don’t advocate discrimination against anyone categorically for their race. If you can say the same, then congratulations: you’re not a racist. So who cares how Democrats try unjustly to discredit you? Democrats — the party of slavery, Jim Crow, the Ku Klux Klan, black disarmament, among myriad other anti-black policies — have precisely zero moral credibility on racial issues against Republicans, whose party was founded explicitly to free the Democrats' slaves. Planned Parenthood as credibly accuses Santa Claus of child abuse as Democrats accuse Republicans of racism.

Roseanne deserves to be chided for her bad joke, and she was right to apologize. But which is more likely: the eccentric, admittedly mentally unstable pop culture figure we’ve all known for decades told a crude, rude, unfunny joke; or that Roseanne Barr is suddenly a white supremacist? No conservative needs to defend Roseanne; she’s a thick-skinned showbiz veteran who can defend herself. But neither should conservatives rush to condemn her in the pathetic, grandiose, desperate hope of winning the radical Left’s approval.

The economy is booming, the bureaucracy is poised to shrink, federal judges are respecting our laws and Constitution, illegal aliens are being denied entry into the United States, President Trump is resisting extralegal attempts to overturn the 2016 election, and so Democrats are furious. The only tool they have left is to feign hysterical indignation over tweets on news cycle after news cycle. Conservatives shouldn’t take the bait. We owe the party of slavery no explanation, and we shouldn’t covet its partisans’ approval.

Source: https://www.dailywire.com/news/31344...hael-j-knowles

[bots]

Originally Posted by Maru

Posting this for Alf



Source: https://www.dailywire.com/news/31344...hael-j-knowles

it's not what you would call a balanced article though is it It's coming from a place of deep resentment

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Maru

Posting this for Alf



Source: https://www.dailywire.com/news/31344...hael-j-knowles

Excellent article and very true. It has puzzled me for a while now why so many are trying so hard to appease the loony left. Who cares what such an agenda-driven bunch of radicals think anyway! It all feels like some kind of fear-fuelled pied-piper effect. People need to grow a backbone.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Alf

Why was it racist? I've seen many people being likened to look like animals, I've never thought it racist. Unless you're saying non White people should be excluded from being the butt of a joke? I find that racist, so what are we going to do about that?

Of course her free speech is not incact, she's been fired from her job for it. I wouldn't want to be fired for that, so I don't agree with Rosanne having it happen to her.

Yes it is. She was well within her rights to say what she did... so she did.

ABC were well within their rights to say they don't wish to work with and associate their business with such views and ended their collaboration.

That's how it works.

Free speech isn't a right to say something offensive and nobody else has the right to respond or have their own opinion and view on what's been said.

But... you knew that.

[Alf]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Yes it is. She was well within her rights to say what she did... so she did.

ABC were well within their rights to say they don't wish to work with and associate their business with such views and ended their collaboration.

That's how it works.

Free speech isn't a right to say something offensive and nobody else has the right to respond or have their own opinion and view on what's been said.

But... you knew that.

It's like if you posted a picture of Snoop dog next to a picture of a Dobermann, and then your boss got in touch with you and said "sorry mate, we're gonna have to fire you fom your job, take away your living". That is the equivalent of what has happened to Rosanne, in reality.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Alf

It's like if you posted a picture of Snoop dog next to a picture of a Dobermann, and then your boss got in touch with you and said "sorry mate, we're gonna have to fire you fom your job, take away your living". That is the equivalent of what has happened to Rosanne, in reality.

No, Roseanne is an outspoken racist. More fool her if she felt her bosses would be happy with one of the faces of their company being racist on a very public platform.

But... you knew that.

[Alf]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

No, Roseanne is an outspoken racist. More fool her if she felt her bosses would be happy with one of the faces of their company being racist on a very public platform.

But... you knew that.

What I do know is that you don't seem to be on the side of the worker, but are prepared to fight the corner for the monopolies and champion them when they make people unemployed for pathetic political reasons.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Alf

What I do know is that you don't seem to be on the side of the worker, but are prepared to fight the corner for the monopolies and champion them when they make people unemployed for pathetic political reasons.

Yes, Roseanne is like a factory worker, and her boss is the big evil corporate machine.

Back in the real world.... Roseanne is the multi-millionaire executive producer and leading actress of a globally famous sitcom so far from the penniless, blameless and sh*t upon victim you try to portray. A collaboration has been severed, a single mother hasn't just been sacked from her minimum wage job.

But.... you knew that.