CNN Doxxes a gif maker

[TofuFighter]

Methinks the auto-censor function should catch this word you used. Or not typing it in the first place would work too.

In this context, '◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊◊' is a word you should become familiar with. (presumably the autocensor is missing it because of the conjuction)

While the word used to refer mainly to useless/racist/unfunny posts, the netizens of r/donald have adopted it as a kind of badge of honor. Kind of an internet version of anti-intellectualism. 4chan does a similar thing with the word fag, being both and insult and a term of endearment at the same time.

The reason i say this is important is because older people, even tech-savvy older people, generally aren't familiar with the cultural terminology on sites like this, and that creates a barrier to understanding them.

 

[d4m10n]

And a video shared on the internet is also publicly available as that case clearly illustrated.

Unlike HAS, those stupid frat boys didn't choose to share their racism with the world.

 

[TofuFighter]

Unlike HAS, those stupid frat boys didn't choose to share their racism with the world.

Arguably HAS only shares with his fellow racists and conspiracy theorists. It's not easy to spend much time in r/Donald, /pol or similar places if you have even the faintest of liberal values.

I'd really like to see the Bronies flood that subreddit.

 

[xjx388]

Methinks the auto-censor function should catch this word you used. Or not typing it in the first place would work too.

I figured it would catch it. My apologies.

Mods: Can it be added to the auto-censor?

 

[xjx388]

Unlike HAS, those stupid frat boys didn't choose to share their racism with the world.

Of course they did. They were on a bus where people were clearly filming them. There were also people outside the frat present -their dates. Everyone should know by now (just as HAS should have known about reddit) that anything captured on a phone camera can and will be easily be shared with one press of a button.

Anonymity . . . that's quaint.

 

[d4m10n]

Levi & Parker probably counted on their dates to follow the social norm that what happens on the racist party bus stays on the racist party bus.

Similarly, HAS counts on the social norm against doxing to protect him from being publicly linked with his racist ideas.

Anonymity . . . that's quaint.

Agreed. [emoji12]

 

[The Big Dog]

The College video analogy is insipid because Trump Pro-Wrestling video is not in any way shape or form racist.

the lengths CNN fans will go to protect a multibillion dollar corporate behemoth.

 

[d4m10n]

CNN fans? I don't even watch.

 

[d4m10n]

The College video analogy is insipid because Trump Pro-Wrestling video is not in any way shape or form racist.

So it was okay for CNN to publish their names, in your view?

 

[johnny karate]

The College video analogy is insipid because Trump Pro-Wrestling video is not in any way shape or form racist.

No, but the guy who made it is. And all his innocuous video did was promote violence against the media in a social environment in which members of the media were already being assaulted by Republicans while their constituents cheer. No big deal.

the lengths CNN fans will go to protect a multibillion dollar corporate behemoth.

Why do you hate the First Amendment?

 

[TofuFighter]

the lengths CNN fans will go to protect a multibillion dollar corporate behemoth.

"the lengths CNN fans will go to"
discussing the merits of it on a web forum.

 

[d4m10n]

If someone makes an effort to keep racist speech safely anonymous, does that make them a fan of anonymity or racism?

 

[Imhotep]

Only a CNN fan would ask that

 

[xjx388]

If someone makes an effort to keep racist speech safely anonymous, does that make them a fan of anonymity or racism?

If someone makes an effort to keep racist speech free from government interference, does that make them a fan of the First Amendment or racism?

 

[d4m10n]

If someone makes an effort to keep racist speech free from government interference, does that make them a fan of the First Amendment or racism?

There are good arguments to be made for a free marketplace of ideas where no one uses force to impose content-based restrictions. Do those good arguments extend to protecting people from being associated with their own words when use of force is already off the table?

 

[phiwum]

There are good arguments to be made for a free marketplace of ideas where no one uses force to impose content-based restrictions. Do those good arguments extend to protecting people from being associated with their own words when use of force is already off the table?

I'm sympathetic to your position, but there is the problem of overkill in the internet age. Jon Ronson's book on internet shaming brings that point home.

I am not saying that CNN would've been wrong to publish his name, but that we need to be careful in dissing internet anonymity generally. It is a thorny issue, far as I'm concerned. The punishment can easily exceed the wrong done.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[xjx388]

There are good arguments to be made for a free marketplace of ideas where no one uses force to impose content-based restrictions. Do those good arguments extend to protecting people from being associated with their own words when use of force is already off the table?

That's not really what you asked originally though: You asked if supporting anonymity for racists is the same thing as supporting racism -at least that's the way I interpreted it. My response was meant to convey that I don't think supporting a racist's right to anonymity necessarily means that one supports racism.

But, to answer this question, I don't think that HAS had any right to expect that other people would respect his anonymity. He said it; therefore, I see nothing wrong with CNN connecting him to his own words. That's not the crux of my problem with CNN in this case.

 

[d4m10n]

That's not really what you asked originally though: You asked if supporting anonymity for racists is the same thing as supporting racism -at least that's the way I interpreted it.

What I meant to ask is whether it makes sense for us to extend the social courtesy of anonymity to those who use it for hateful speech.

 

[Foolmewunz]

The College video analogy is insipid because Trump Pro-Wrestling video is not in any way shape or form racist.

the lengths CNN fans will go to protect a multibillion dollar corporate behemoth.

The lengths some bigot-enablers will go to protect the deplorables and cover for their Bigot-in-Chief!

 

[Mumbles]

The lengths some bigot-enablers will go to protect the deplorables and cover for their Bigot-in-Chief!

It's remarkable.

So, has CNN actually doxxed this guy yet? Or is this still just a very long thread complaining about hoe we shouldn't expose the identities of online bigots?