The left censors free expression once again

originally posted by: tovenar

CMT, originally launched as CMTV, is an American basic cable and satellite television channel that is owned by Viacom Global Entertainment Group, a unit of the Viacom Media Networks division of Viacom

Per Wikipedia

So the censorship question is really about Viacom’s content policies and who decides within them.

I move that we stop using the negative verb “censor”, and replace it with the affirmative term “curate.” As in, “Viacom curated the crap out of Jason Aldean’s video. “

Nah.

I'll still use;

Censor
Silence
Book-burner
Authoritarian
Fascist

. . . . .

originally posted by: beyondknowledge2
I don't see a problem with this song. Just compare it to many rap lyrics and you will see how tame this song actually is.

By this song, Chattanooga TN is a small-town. A couple of years ago, some BLM showed up to cause trouble. They were from out of town. They were ran out of town without resorting to violence. The six of them left and did not come back. The counter protest was in the hundreds of all races or so I was told by someone that was there.


It is more of anywhere but certain big cities where this song applies.

Three years ago, the shopping district in Long Beach CA was destroyed by vandals and looters during the George Floyd hysteria - NBC LOS ANGELES

My town sits on the opposite side of the Port of L.A. and word came down that the looters were headed our way.

This was the response



Note that this is NOT a redneck town in any way, it's Los Angeles. We've got Italians, Croatians, Mexicans, Blacks, and others including the occasional Anglo like myself.

I guess the troublemakers changed their minds because they never showed up - lucky for them.

a reply to: underpass61

They’ve always had a problem with people that stand up to the criminal “peaceful protests”

a reply to: underpass61

That was a proper response to the situation. It worked and still works. Small town is most of America. Let's keep it that way.

a reply to: beyondknowledge2
Mob mentality is where the cowards are - even a little pushback will send them running.

originally posted by: RazorV66
a reply to: underpass61

They’ve always had a problem with people that stand up to the criminal “peaceful protests”

Me too! Can you believe we still have threads here calling cops thugs and stating they disregarded their oath by while being beaten by "peaceful protestors" they were trying to stand up to on J6? Crazy.

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: Byrd

Freedom of speech means that yes, a business can choose to not allow certain language/songs/books/whatever on their premises -BUT- the government can't stop anyone from singing the song, drinking Bud Lite, whatever, whichever.

Is it still free speech if the government asks or encourages them to do it?

Asking for a friend.

How does a government "encourage" someone to do something?

Are we talking about the WHOLE government (DOJ, Transportation Department, Post Office, Congress, the military, Americorps, Library of Congress and more) or just part of a government (Department of Energy, State Department, etc)?

If it's the latter case then it's not "the government" doing anything but individuals in the government.

And what does "encourage" mean? "Two guys with big guns are going to shoot everyone you ever loved AND take your car"? Does it mean "Here's six million dollars to do this"? Does it mean "We'll jail you if you don't?"

Asking for myself because your response is awfully vague.

a reply to: DBCowboy
Edit: why do i even bother anymore

You've been played like a fiddle if you fell for this🙄

I don't care for censorship, period. And I think it works both ways. That is, if we're going to be up in arms about a country music song being "censored," then shouldn't we have the same reaction to people trying to ban books in public and school libraries? Or is censorship a good thing when we don't like the content? (Thinking of both the left and the right here.)

originally posted by: boredhere74
I'm sorry but anyone bitching about this song had better boycott, "cancel" whatever the new buzzword is any and all rap songs that mention a gun, sluts, drugs, killing cops, etc. There is no difference

You're right. Not much difference.

However, even Rap get's a bad 'rap'.

This might be something that could get by in the 80s but not so much today. Personally, I think this is a lot too REDNECK for my blood. That whole mentality is just silly. I get your stance. I get that you wont let anyone #### on you. But... That's a really bad way to go about it.

It's called being a vigilante and it's illegal, last I checked. Kind of goes hand in hand with the riots over the past years but worse because you're actually going after people instead of buildings.

There is no common sense to this "way".

a reply to: DBCowboy

As a lover of hip hop it pains me to say it..but if you are going to complain about anything you see in this video and are not doing the same thing for rap music, you need to STFU right now. Any lefties want to debate me on this?

originally posted by: WingDingLuey
this the song?

Jason Aldean - Try That In A Small Town (Official Music Video)

The song's lyrics sound fascist by nature...

originally posted by: Gandalf77
I don't care for censorship, period. And I think it works both ways. That is, if we're going to be up in arms about a country music song being "censored," then shouldn't we have the same reaction to people trying to ban books in public and school libraries? Or is censorship a good thing when we don't like the content? (Thinking of both the left and the right here.)

censorship and no discussion has been the tool of one side but is now being used by the other and in the process its forcing people to debate to discuss and force a return to plurality..

the effect will be the same as the reformation lifted the cap that constrained what people could say think do before the reformation..

In so many ways its good even when its bad as the days of no discussion and no debate are gone..

originally posted by: Timber13

It's called being a vigilante and it's illegal, last I checked. Kind of goes hand in hand with the riots over the past years but worse because you're actually going after people instead of buildings.

Can you explain how supporting the police on someone attacking your community is vigilantism?

Also you are saying our police should arrest the building the attackers are from? Or perhaps the attacked should go and attack the building the attackers are from?

You missed something really big there. Buildings very, very, very seldom go to other communities and attack them.

a reply to: Erno86

You use the word fascist in an entirely new way I was previously unaware of. Please explain how big government running everything has anything to do with this song.

a reply to: beyondknowledge2

The song's lyrics also sounds like authoritarian vigilantism of the highest order.

originally posted by: Gandalf77
I don't care for censorship, period. And I think it works both ways. That is, if we're going to be up in arms about a country music song being "censored," then shouldn't we have the same reaction to people trying to ban books in public and school libraries? Or is censorship a good thing when we don't like the content? (Thinking of both the left and the right here.)

I think removing the DERP is key here. When you say "book banning", but you are referring to people taking sexualized books out of small children's school libraries, it makes me think you don't really understand the word at all.

The song the OP refers to has been censored on CMT, or rather the video for the song has. There seems to be anger about the fact that this song tells a truth that is difficult to come to terms with. Assholes who like to band together and do what they want, would likely not survive, should they choose to try that in a small town. It's in the news, and being talked about by many outlets.

But please try to understand the big words if you wish to use them.

originally posted by: Erno86
a reply to: beyondknowledge2

The song's lyrics also sounds like authoritarian vigilantism of the highest order.

Yes, they do. They sound like an ominous warning that should you try to pull the same bull# in a small town, the outcome won't be like what most big cities, saw, but rather more like what Kenosha saw.

dickfaces who would try things like that would do best to heed the warning. But if you want to come to a small town and enjoy it's people and local delicacies, you are more than welcome. It's all about how you behave.

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: Byrd

Freedom of speech means that yes, a business can choose to not allow certain language/songs/books/whatever on their premises -BUT- the government can't stop anyone from singing the song, drinking Bud Lite, whatever, whichever.

Is it still free speech if the government asks or encourages them to do it?

Asking for a friend.

How does a government "encourage" someone to do something?

Are we talking about the WHOLE government (DOJ, Transportation Department, Post Office, Congress, the military, Americorps, Library of Congress and more) or just part of a government (Department of Energy, State Department, etc)?

If it's the latter case then it's not "the government" doing anything but individuals in the government.

And what does "encourage" mean? "Two guys with big guns are going to shoot everyone you ever loved AND take your car"? Does it mean "Here's six million dollars to do this"? Does it mean "We'll jail you if you don't?"

Asking for myself because your response is awfully vague.

Use whatever word you like, it's all splitting hairs. The fact remains the Biden administration and other government agencies have asked, encouraged, coerced, paid(?) companies and corporations to censor free speech. Something they are forbidden to do constitutionally.
District court grants injunction preventing the Biden administration and other federal agencies from censoring speech it disagrees with on social media platforms.

Biden administration to appeal federal ruling that prevents it from pressuring social media companies to censor wrongthink, cure narratives

Ex-Biden aide Jen Psaki hit for coercing tech companies to censor conservatives by federal judge

Elections Judge orders Biden’s DHS to release files on agents accused of censoring election ‘misinformation’

I could go on, but the point being, given recent history, it is reasonable to suspect that government censorship is directly or indirectly responsible for CMT's actions, because it has encouraged this behavior even in cases where it has not coerced it.