again, excuse me, i dont distinguish between smoke, pot, crack whatever and whatever. i see all substances altering consciousness with the possibility of having any degree of addiction, other than meditation of course, in the same "pot".
well. in any case i wonder what we can do as/. to support this stand.
our support and even interest in the matter might encourage college administration to back her decision, given that many youngsters who interested in technology and going to get enrolled in colleges will be following/., even through their friends, if not directly. heck, many non-techie people follow/. from what i understand even.
this can be a major chance for that university for going into spotlight in a most positive manner, and attracting quality technology students, which is something universities are working their arses over to achieve.
you, are one of the people who believes in some picture and wants the world to be as depicted by it.
it is not.
day by day we see hilarious lawsuits coming up in usa between even remotely relevant parties, and curiously these are put to court, and a solid decision is reached. even for stuff that are not clearly defined by your law.
so, it wouldnt be too hard for any u.s. court to see that, imus was fired while exercising HIS freedom of speech, on WHATEVER reason.
in the past we have seen lawsuits coming up in usa on grounds that an employee couldnt be fired even if his/her ethnic, political, personal composure was not in total compliance with the direction a company was heading.
therefore, firing someone because "his standing will curb our revenue" would be subject to same kind of treatment in an american court.
had this case been in europe, imus would fuck the hell outta msnbc.
I had heard that scandinavian countries were generally on the edge of liberal & humanist & progressive thoughts and policies, but, doh, this just hit the jackpot. Its like some dream becoming real.
First, learn more on whatever topic you are talking about, before trying to scorn someone only to find out that you were ridiculeing yourself. Then, refer to the below thread and its follow ups to learn how, and why the black and white fucktards who are insulting countless factions do not get "fired", yet make more money :
Again, I still don't see it. Imus can start a daily podcast for a couple of thousand dollars that would have world-wide reach. Given that he was reportedly paid $8 million per year, he has the resources. He certainly has the built-in audience.
he might have been bashed while he was just being paid $2000 a month. and we would never heard of him. and such things are probably happening.
and as for lawsuits, cash and freedom issues, i still dont see your point. every now and then we find some curious lawsuit appearing as "someone vs something" to the extent that many stuff seem so abstract in formulating, but still are taken as legal cases and concluded. americans are innovative people. im sure if they wanted, these watchdogs would be able to formulate something to use against these rappers. but they are not sparing enough effort it seems. better to go for the white guy.
Imus' freedom of expression is not "hampered" by anything. He's still free to say what he wants, and if he wants to set up his own "Nappy Headed Ho" radio show and pay for it out of his own pocket or private donations, he's free to do so.
nay. its hampered.
black rappers are not having to pay for their freedom of expression from their own pockets. companies like msnbc whatnot are funding time, and they are able to reach millions by that means.
if we take this into account, we can say that freedom of expression was hampered.
its like democracy - everyone can be candidates, but only the rich can get elected. just like this is a democracy in appearances only, that type of freedom of expression is also one that is in appearances. whatever you say, if you dont have the means to reach people, it wont matter.
whats the difference for freedom of speech being hampered due to "different revenue models" than its being hampered by government pressure in repressive regimes ? there is none.
if people keep buying it, then the watchdogs still sue labels for supporting and perpetrating such kind of behaviour through their support for such bands.
if demeaning a race for financial "revenue model" can be justified by first amendment, this radio host can justify that his freedom of expression was hampered by the financial concerns of nbc. it should work both ways.
but first amendment didnt got in the way this time for getting this host fired. If lawsuits do not avail, those watchdogs should utilize the same kind of pressure on the labels to get them drop those artists.
So you would like to highlight the fact that your a sexist too?
being ordered around while at the same time being despised, having do menial work, ie - modern day slavery, for 1.5 years, and some portion of the society, leave aside undergoing the same forced treatment, has NO idea that it even exists ?
well yea, if that is not being sexist, i AM sexist.
as for the other parts of your post, you have repeated yourself. i have nothing new to say.
you know as well as i do that this is a common trend. and its not only about blacks and rappers and such in u.s., but its about radical islamists in europe and the morons who defend their "right" in expense of the public, just like chamberlain defended hitler. i could start counting examples and finish it only after half of the night had passed.
And as a previous poster noted, the pressure and protests didn't get Imus fired - advertiser's leaving CBS & MSNBC got Imus fired. As long as the label execs are making money for their shareholders, their jobs are secure. It's all about the money.
why dont black pressure groups levy the same avenue for pressuring advertisers out of record labels so they will quit with the offensive rappers ?
There can be no conditionals or contexts in equality. NOTHING can justify some group being at liberty with something, and some other group not. Refer to the below comment :
Slashdot Mirror
again, excuse me, i dont distinguish between smoke, pot, crack whatever and whatever. i see all substances altering consciousness with the possibility of having any degree of addiction, other than meditation of course, in the same "pot".
1 - i am 5 years old
2 - what the fuck are you doing here, if you are not taking someone who's speech and brain are lacking grammar and college education, respectively ?
i am under the idiotically mistaken idea that any more stuff running and affecting client-side, more problems a site's visitors are bound to achieve.
i was under the same idiotically mistaken idea that more stuff running on client side would eventually mean problems, and i was proven right.
And its simple as that.
excuse me, but i am not able to see smoking crack as a liberty.
As a web developer all i can say is this.
(she was a girl am i right ?)
/. to support this stand.
/., even through their friends, if not directly. heck, many non-techie people follow /. from what i understand even.
well. in any case i wonder what we can do as
our support and even interest in the matter might encourage college administration to back her decision, given that many youngsters who interested in technology and going to get enrolled in colleges will be following
this can be a major chance for that university for going into spotlight in a most positive manner, and attracting quality technology students, which is something universities are working their arses over to achieve.
you, are one of the people who believes in some picture and wants the world to be as depicted by it.
it is not.
day by day we see hilarious lawsuits coming up in usa between even remotely relevant parties, and curiously these are put to court, and a solid decision is reached. even for stuff that are not clearly defined by your law.
so, it wouldnt be too hard for any u.s. court to see that, imus was fired while exercising HIS freedom of speech, on WHATEVER reason.
in the past we have seen lawsuits coming up in usa on grounds that an employee couldnt be fired even if his/her ethnic, political, personal composure was not in total compliance with the direction a company was heading.
therefore, firing someone because "his standing will curb our revenue" would be subject to same kind of treatment in an american court.
had this case been in europe, imus would fuck the hell outta msnbc.
Its crying time eh ?
antitrust was not the littlest of concerns for microsoft while it was stamping on the competition back in 90s.
see, that was what went around, but this, THIS is what comes around. (from scrubs)
I had heard that scandinavian countries were generally on the edge of liberal & humanist & progressive thoughts and policies, but, doh, this just hit the jackpot. Its like some dream becoming real.
First, learn more on whatever topic you are talking about, before trying to scorn someone only to find out that you were ridiculeing yourself. Then, refer to the below thread and its follow ups to learn how, and why the black and white fucktards who are insulting countless factions do not get "fired", yet make more money :
7 38051
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=230787&cid=18
he might have been bashed while he was just being paid $2000 a month. and we would never heard of him. and such things are probably happening.
and as for lawsuits, cash and freedom issues, i still dont see your point. every now and then we find some curious lawsuit appearing as "someone vs something" to the extent that many stuff seem so abstract in formulating, but still are taken as legal cases and concluded. americans are innovative people. im sure if they wanted, these watchdogs would be able to formulate something to use against these rappers. but they are not sparing enough effort it seems. better to go for the white guy.
nay. its hampered.
black rappers are not having to pay for their freedom of expression from their own pockets. companies like msnbc whatnot are funding time, and they are able to reach millions by that means.
if we take this into account, we can say that freedom of expression was hampered.
its like democracy - everyone can be candidates, but only the rich can get elected. just like this is a democracy in appearances only, that type of freedom of expression is also one that is in appearances. whatever you say, if you dont have the means to reach people, it wont matter.
whats the difference for freedom of speech being hampered due to "different revenue models" than its being hampered by government pressure in repressive regimes ? there is none.
if people keep buying it, then the watchdogs still sue labels for supporting and perpetrating such kind of behaviour through their support for such bands.
if demeaning a race for financial "revenue model" can be justified by first amendment, this radio host can justify that his freedom of expression was hampered by the financial concerns of nbc. it should work both ways.
but first amendment didnt got in the way this time for getting this host fired. If lawsuits do not avail, those watchdogs should utilize the same kind of pressure on the labels to get them drop those artists.
being ordered around while at the same time being despised, having do menial work, ie - modern day slavery, for 1.5 years, and some portion of the society, leave aside undergoing the same forced treatment, has NO idea that it even exists ?
well yea, if that is not being sexist, i AM sexist.
as for the other parts of your post, you have repeated yourself. i have nothing new to say.
wow. fantastic logic you have there, "morontard".
"we are not talking about freedom, he can say anything he wants". but he will lose his job if he says whatever he wants.
suprisingly, a job is a prerequisite to surviving in contemporary civilization.
in extreme cases, if you cant pay rent, bills, you are in the streets, and with no insurance, you are probably on the way to davy jones's locker.
theres not much freedom of expression when you risk losing everything.
if you are going to make a point, dont contradict yourself.
by dillydally fairies of course, who could it be.
so ? cant these watchdogs start a class action lawsuit against labels ?
that one was one of the most hit-the-spot comments ever made in this debate.
you know as well as i do that this is a common trend. and its not only about blacks and rappers and such in u.s., but its about radical islamists in europe and the morons who defend their "right" in expense of the public, just like chamberlain defended hitler. i could start counting examples and finish it only after half of the night had passed.
refer to this, please : http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=230787&thresho ld=1&commentsort=1&mode=thread&cid=18734559
why dont black pressure groups levy the same avenue for pressuring advertisers out of record labels so they will quit with the offensive rappers ?
For the continuance and well being of equalistic principles, some contradiction is needed :
o ld=1&commentsort=1&mode=thread&cid=18734653
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=230787&thresh
There can be no conditionals or contexts in equality. NOTHING can justify some group being at liberty with something, and some other group not. Refer to the below comment :
o ld=1&commentsort=1&mode=thread&cid=18734559
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=230787&thresh