Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, May 16, 2019

In multiple settings, we are seeing a trend toward narrowing the scope of opinions allowed in the public arena. Heading into high school and college commencement season, a rising tide of ideological censorship is drowning out diversity of opinion. And academia leads the way in defining acceptable thought. [snip]

As a civil society, we are careening toward ideological balkanization. This trend of labeling opinions with which we disagree as dangerous and hateful threatens Americans' foundational freedoms. Charges of dangerous speech are laid as an exercise in bullying and raw power.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

We don't have a government censorship problem - the 1st Amendment and Citizens United take care of that.

We have a growing censorship problem in academia, corporate culture, pop culture and big tech. Might as well throw social media into the mix too.

#1 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-05-16 02:58 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

A key quote from the article:

"The Googlers refused to see her, or hear her, in her own voice. That's discrimination and exclusion in action. The takeaway message is clear: Diversity means agreeing with us. Disagreeing with us is intolerance and even "violence." "

The same behaviors are echoed here repeatedly, as well as on CNN.

#2 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-05-16 03:16 PM | Reply

Here's who Owns the Media: Barack Obama

Posted by JeffJ at 2019-04-09 10:16 AM

#3 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2019-05-16 03:30 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

speaking of violence

when did some liberal take to their car and run it thru a crowd of people they Disagree with?

#4 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2019-05-16 03:43 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

-The takeaway message is clear: Diversity means agreeing with us. Disagreeing with us is intolerance and even "violence." "

At the very least, "hate" is used to describe any disagreement. violence is pretty strong and I doubt very many take it seriously.

I don't see anybody defending the practices and incidents included in the attached article. Telling.....

You can blame Trump for plenty....but not for an overreaction to any kind of disagreement on ideology or politics.

#5 | Posted by eberly at 2019-05-16 03:54 PM | Reply

Let's start with removing all States blasphemy laws.

Academia hasn't criminalized speech like the Reich wing has.

#6 | Posted by bored at 2019-05-16 04:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Funny stuff. The article was written by someone who works at The Heritage Foundation, and ideological conservative think tank geared towards influencing public policy.

#7 | Posted by Derek_Wildstar at 2019-05-16 04:28 PM | Reply

#3 | POSTED BY CHIEFTUTMOSES AT 2019-05-16 03:30 PM | FLAG:
#4 | POSTED BY CHIEFTUTMOSES v AT 2019-05-16 03:43 PM | REPLY | FLAG

Notice the timestamps denoting afternoon inebriation. disgusting.

#8 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-05-16 04:31 PM | Reply

--Funny stuff. The article was written by someone who works at The Heritage Foundation,

Bingo! We have a winner in the slaughter-the-source race. It's usually Corky, the all-time champ, but DR leftists are pretty much interchangeable, like Borg drones. Pop one into the regeneration chamber and another takes its place.

#9 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-05-16 04:53 PM | Reply | Funny: 2 | Newsworthy 2

Censorship is running wild in private industry. Worst in college and damn near as bad in social media.

#10 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-05-16 05:48 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

#7

What's even funnier than the all too predictable STS is the fact that you felt compelled to explain the Heritage Foundation to the class.

#11 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-05-16 06:09 PM | Reply

"Bingo! We have a winner in the slaughter-the-source race."

He did do a good job of remphasizing the article's key take-away.

#12 | Posted by madbomber at 2019-05-16 06:48 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#7 | POSTED BY DEREK_WILDSTAR

What's funny is the self-described liberals of the '60's derided censorship and fought against it.

Once they obtained power, they became exactly what they originally fought against.

#13 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-05-16 06:56 PM | Reply

Jeff, if you think there's a censorship problem at universities, I suggest you leave the Liberty campus immediately and get to an actual university.

#14 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-05-16 07:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#6 | Posted by bored at 2019-05-16 04:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The ignorance of two. Blasphemy law were ruled unconstitutional under the First Amendment decades ago. The few laws that narrowly attempt to criminalize some speech likely suffer the same impediment.

#15 | Posted by et_al at 2019-05-16 07:14 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

I see you all are investing in the heritage foundation, again

Proof positive you people are incapable of learning from past mistakes

#16 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2019-05-16 07:43 PM | Reply

"Leave the liberty campus"

See jeffy. That's how you "nail it"

#17 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2019-05-16 07:46 PM | Reply

Real Clear Horse Manure.

#18 | Posted by Angrydad at 2019-05-16 09:31 PM | Reply

Real Clear Horse Manure.

#18 | POSTED BY ANGRYDAD

It's the best political website on the internet IMO.

I strongly encourage you to check it out.

#19 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-05-16 09:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#15 6 States still have blasphemy laws on the books. If you are not willing to get rid of those laws you can STFU about college codes of conduct.

#20 | Posted by bored at 2019-05-16 11:54 PM | Reply

#1 Please Jeff, lecture me more about academia.

SMH

#21 | Posted by bocaink at 2019-05-17 12:56 AM | Reply

#15 6 States still have blasphemy laws on the books. If you are not willing to get rid of those laws you can STFU about college codes of conduct.

#20 | POSTED BY BORED

Are you incapable of chewing gum and walking at the same time?

That one wrong exists doesn't excuse another wrong.

Your deflection is lame.

#22 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-05-17 10:13 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#20 GASP! Is that WHATABOUTISM?

#23 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2019-05-17 10:35 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Sooooo...someone explain to me the moral difference between:

1. Denying use of a common, non-specialized product (social media, a podium) to someone because you disagree with what they say
2. Denying use of a common, non-specialized product (bus seat, lunch counter) to someone because of their race

#24 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2019-05-17 10:43 AM | Reply

As a civil society, we are careening toward ideological balkanization. This trend of labeling opinions with which we disagree as dangerous and hateful threatens Americans' foundational freedoms.

I hate this over simplification.

It's not simple disagreement, it's the left and right moving towards the fringe and lying to make their narrative fit that's the problem. Honesty is considered quaint and unnecessary or even as an obstacle to attaining the goal.

#25 | Posted by jpw at 2019-05-17 01:10 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort