What Did You Say?
Commentator Marc Lamont Hill has been fired by CNN after making statements at a UN pro-Palestinian event. At one point he echoed a line heard from the terrorist group Hamas, words taken by many as calling for the destruction of Israel.
Hill claims he was misunderstood. Edelstein took down the joke and apologized. But they're just the latest in a long list of people who've been fired in recent times over something they said that was considered offensive.
Of course, private companies are free to get rid of anyone who says or does things they find unacceptable (or fear others will find unacceptable). But still, it's probably a good thing for society in general if people are given some leeway. It's not always clear where the line is, but if there's doubt, probably best to let it go.
People simply disagree on a lot of political issues, and some people will always be saying dumb or offensive things. Better, in general, to answer them rather than try to make them go away. People will also make dumb or offensive jokes. Even if you think there's no excuse for what they said, most of the time you can tell them that and move on.
posted by LAGuy @ 9:04 AM
4 Comments:
What if corporations become so strict in their policies that they are more powerful than government? I mean they are always bragging that they are bigger than countries. Just this week, a video game, Fortnite at 200 million users, was described as bigger than a bunch of countries. And corporations such as Google have influence even beyond their consumer base.
So, is it possible that corporations (which are free to get rid of anyone, etc) are more powerful and actually more invested in getting rid of ideas they don't like? And if that is so, how should we solve for it.
I believe in free association and ideas, but I am concerned that corporate culture may be more dangerous to these ideas than the state.
Governments have the police, and the right to use violence. When the government decides something, there's nowhere else to go. Corporations do have some power, but even the biggest can lose market share, and even go under.
It's true corporations may be using their pull in ways that deny us freedom. But I still think the preferred solution is to have a healthy free market, where people can teach these companies to go in a different direction, or threaten to shop somewhere else.
Brian, I worry about the same thing.
Generally, I am glad to let corporations handle their affairs internally. However, I'm not a strict libertarian on this. I believe that in 1955, when business throughout the Deep South (and most of the Border South -- even Maryland) wouldn't allow blacks as patrons, then at that point it ceased being merely a private business matter, and became a public matter. Thus some sort of political remedy was justified.
Suppose that we hit the point where 90% of political discussion takes place on Facebook, Twitter, Google, and Instagram. And suppose that these companies all agree that certain opinions are "hate speech" and certain factual claims are "fake news", and suppress them. That would seriously change Americans' ability to converse about politics.
In an ideal world, Americans would immediately switch to freer forums. But that probably wouldn't happen. So I do worry about this.
(Guess I'll be Eobard for this one. After all, I might be applying for a job at one of the aforementioned corporations someday....)
Note that I place the bar pretty high. If 20% of businesses discrimate against people with red hair, or 20% of political speech is filtered through a certain platform, I'm libertarian about such things. As LAGuy pointed out, government censorship (backed with fines and criminal penalties) is more dangerous than corporate censorship. In many cases, a "healthy free market" can handle such things well.
But I still think there's a bar that can be met. It was met by Jim Crow in 1955. (Of course, Jim Crow was enforced by laws, which libertarians would be the first to oppose. But it was also enforced by political pressure from individuals, on a mass scale.)
Today, left-wing students and internet denizens can get someone fired for stating established facts -- such as the fact that a sizeable majority of minors who declare themselves to be transgender will simply grow out of that phase. (This is not true of adults.) But professional academics can lose their careers for stating such things. Once the mob turns their guns on Facebook, how long until they agree to whatever form of censorship the mob demands?
Post a Comment
<< Home