Milo Yianopoulos banned from Twitter-Bad precedence for censorship in social media

In regards to "Safe Spaces" and privilege.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOMfTFW29lI

Where is the censorship though? It has nothing to do with his opinion about the movie seemingly, but rather how he is a luminary in a twitter troll net. It's their service, they make their rules, and decide how to enforce them. Twitter has no authority over this Milo person beyond his use of the service... and the rules were broken to such an extent they could not not notice. I assume they choose to not notice minor infractions to allow the service to grow. Sounds like a conspiracy theory type fantasy to conflate the two, when all its seems to say is those on one side seem to break the rules more then the other.

Freedom of speech has never truly been free. It's an idea, a concept created with all good intentions which is now in today's age being used for a plethora of reasons such as marketing and politics, none of which possess a drop of virtue held over from it's original intended purpose. It exists on the premise of convenience, and is manipulated to talk over people in attempts at gaining attention, more so than being included in the process of exchanging ideas used towards open discussion. With that said, I cannot stand the guy, lol. The supposed "council" of twitter and Milo both stand on opposite ends of the free speech argument, and nether is really without blame. Free speech cannot exist without someone getting offended, simply put.

What's more important, the freedom of speech, or people's feelings? Is everyone claiming to have had their feelings stepped on really offended, or are a percentage of these said individuals merely using the idea to yell their point across knowing that waving the victim card also gains attention and is seldom scrutinized by the majority, and if so, the attempt to scrutinize itself is also viewed with scrutiny. Language is quickly losing its effectiveness when any attempt of an idea expressed can and usually is used in someone else's personal agenda. Such is no longer a process of discussion in order to convey ideas and understanding, but merely an outlet to shout over everyone else...

It's Joe Rogan, so expect a bit of profanity...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCNsJKVd3BA

Twitter is a service whose terms he agreed to (though presumably didn't read!) when he signed up..

...are a percentage of these said individuals merely using the idea to yell their point across knowing that waving the victim card also gains attention...

I sorta feel that Milo is using a similar tactic.. yelling his point across knowing that it creates division and p***es people off. What does he expect really?

New acronym perhaps, SMJW, social media justice warrior. Joe Rogan becomes his own worst enemy :silly:

Edan wrote: Twitter is a service whose terms he agreed to (though presumably didn't read!) when he signed up..

That is what I was thinking, the user agreement is to self censor, and so twitter is not the one censoring but rather just penalizing what it considers a significant enough breach of that agreement. For this to be inconsistent, they would need to show consistency among examples of any inconsistency.

This is really terrible. Milo was not responsible for any of this and was punished unjustly.

Edit: Also, his Ghostbusters review is legitimately hilarious.

TheDude wrote: This is really terrible. Milo was not responsible for any of this and was punished unjustly.

I'm curious as to why you think that...

Given that some of the stuff I've seen that he's posted on twitter is obviously purposely offensive, it does not surprise me at all that he's been banned..

He deserves to be jailed in my opinion. Ironically, those who lean to the right, are not right.

Edan wrote:

TheDude wrote: This is really terrible. Milo was not responsible for any of this and was punished unjustly.

I'm curious as to why you think that...

Given that some of the stuff I've seen that he's posted on twitter is obviously purposely offensive, it does not surprise me at all that he's been banned..

Milo is a funny guy. He's not politically correct, no, but he's incredibly intelligent. Offense is something taken, never given. I mean he's a gay guy and (mods censor this if it's too offensive for TOTJO) he calls his speaking tour the "dangerous faggot tour". I've listened to tons of his interviews and speeches. Milo only wants to support the freedom of speech and right to personal expression, because he thinks that the first and second amendments are exactly what makes America great and gives it the potential to be the greatest country in the world.

Banning him for a bunch of trolls reacting to a terrible movie, which he did NOT provoke, is blatantly unjust and only serves to demonstrate his point exactly. That we live in a culture which thrives on censorship rather than open public discussion. Milo is a master troll and a sophisticated individual. He likes to poke fun at people, sure. Maybe he offends some people. If we're living in a world where peoples delicate sensibilities are considered more important than free speech, where opposing viewpoints are silenced rather than debated, where you can get banned from a community for no other reason than that you have a different opinion, that's not the kind of world I want to live in.

Milo is a demagogue who, by his own standard, got what he deserved.

Stance: A private company has the right to refuse service to anyone.

Action: Milo gets banned.

Reaction: Help! I'm being oppressed. Freedom of Speech is being infringed upon. The cancerous liberal feminists are at it again!

So it's only okay to refuse service to gay people wanting a wedding cake or black people sitting at diner, but if Milo gets banned suddenly the integrity of free speech is in peril?

I don't like Milo, but I also wasn't jumping for joy when he got banned. I just thought it was remarkable how much of a crybaby he was about it given his staunchly conservative views.

Also, I managed to say how bad this film was without inspiring the ire of my feminist and leftist friends. 750/1000 words dedicating to saying this film is absolute crap.

But for what it's worth, this film was intentionally marketed as an "iconic feminist film" so that Sony could garner support for a film they probably knew was terrible after showing it to test audiences. I was not one of the people who got caught up in the "go see Ghostbusters for feminism!" and I hadn't read Yiannopoulos' review of the film. I just know that Jones got chased off Twitter with all kinds of nasty stuff.

Anyway, here's a fairly entertaining take on how Ghostbusters, a terrible film, became the most overblown feminist issue of 2016.

https://youtu.be/Sn_vAcFGTJU