Boundaries of free speech

Post Reply New Topic

I am observing that people who try and either speak/post links about the actions of Ukrainian soldiers or Ukrainian mafia and/or the Russian perspective in the war are being cancelled as "spreading pro-Russian propaganda"?.

I am not going to comment about events outside of Australia as I seem to be regularly told that I have no business to speak on politics etc. in other countries. Fine.

I find myself curiously in the same boat as some right wingers though. Ben Fordham a regular contributor on Sky News has been blasted by the media/public for questioning why a person who tried to speak on Russian perspective in the war was thrown out of an ABC Q&A television program for trying speak his mind?
https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/t ... c99907e0b9

Fordham correctly pointed out the man has only commented “Believe it or not, there are a lot of Russians here and around the world that support what Putin is doing in the (sic) Ukraine – myself included,” the questioner said.

Speaking on his 2GB talk back program on Friday morning, Fordham suggested the host (Stan Grant) was pressured by producers of the ABC program to remove the man.

“Someone got in Stan’s ear, because it took him 20 minutes and then he decided Sasha had to go,” Fordham said.

“It sounded to me like Stan Grant lost control of his own show.”

Fordham questioned the decision to remove the man at all, saying the whole idea of the program was to have “robust debate”

“Obviously, we don’t support what Russia’s doing, but I don’t think this guy … was advocating violence,” Fordham said.

“He’s a Russian living in Australia and he’s standing up for his own country.”

Maybe I was wrong after all. Cancel culture does exist.

Oh yes, cancel culture exists.
Right now in Russia, you can get up to 15 years in prison for talking about this war in a way not approved by Kremlin. That includes even calling it a war.
They shut down f-book, twitter, youtube and they are working on disconnecting from global internet.

You got a reprimend (not from me) because attacks on ethnicities are forbidden on WP. This is one of the boundaries of free speech called WP rules.

Please, drop this topic if you can't navigate it within the rules.

I'll always be opposed to censorship of any views, regardless of the nature of them. Free expression of ideas, right or wrong, needs to be preserved. That should be obvious to everyone.

One has to know ones enemy in order to defeat said enemy, a truth rapidly being lost.

its not lost, its being increasingly criminalised.

that question about free speech did not get very far now did it?

also dont shoot the messanger quite yet - maybe magz just does what its told.?




It was a good OP on its own cyberdad,

but now its gone all twilight zone, cool lol.

Like Dr Phil but less abusive and more entertaining.

I am refering to your recently removed posts, not to this thread, as the OP seems quite personal on your side.
I will not publicly discuss removed content, so PM if you didn't get it - but I know you did receive an explanation.

The boundaries of free speech here are WP rules.
The general boundaries of free speech are often security and avoiding harm.
Right now, people are dying, civilians are shelled and apologetics or denial of it cost more lives. Calling for more harm on a group are generally outside of the boundaries of free speech in what we consider civilised discussion.

Removal from a show vs 15 years in jail is the difference between a country with respect to free speech and without it.

Thanks, I'm glad we clarified it.

Yes, boundaries of free speech are about what we consider civilized discussion.
The problem with showing Russian side of the conflict is, what Russians see in their TV is completely detached from reality - exactly because they don't have free speech in our most basic form of not being arrested for saying something.
Numerous captured Russian soldiers claim they were expecting local people to welcome them with flowers for freeing them from an evil government. Russian soldiers were shocked to learn the reality.

Is there any contribution to the truth in letting the lies that cost both Ukrainian civilians and Ukrainian and Russian soldiers lives gain more publicity? I'm not surprised by refusals of publishing them further.

Most of us living outside of the region of Russia and Ukraine don't really know what's happening on the ground except through news or through first hand experience being posted on social media.

This seems to be the fatal flaw in a lot of people developing opinions which rely on 2nd hand information that may be going through a filter (as you say).

I don't feel the intel coming through makes me confident to comment on matters like a conflict involving innocent civilians dying (something I am against). The stakes are too high.

But as history is written up then the sources need to be more thoroughly scrutinised and the players involved need to be held accountable if they were involved in crimes.