To all of the people of both here and everywhere who have baselessly accused anyone who criticized or opposed completely needless and unnecessary removals (and self-flagellating apologies of the kind that Hank Azaria did) of content from circulation within popular entertainment and commercial media, during the past 2 years, as being secretly
-“pro-MAGA”
-pro-QAnon
-ascribed to Fox News
-a follower of Tucker Carlson
-subscribed to TheQuartering
-a channer from /pol/ in disguise
-and other unfounded alleged ulterior affiliations and motivations,
take on good, long look on Google at the news about Paramount refusing to remove “offensive” or “insensitive” content from their past film, or even any of the films, themselves, as it objectively would be a form of self-censorship.
That alone is precisely all that what people like myself, who are critical of media companies consistently doing the exact opposite of what Paramount did here, for more than 2 years straight—and who are actually absolutely none of those things listed above—have ever actually advocated for, in and of itself.
@Background Pony #B41B
You can think what you want. A lot of people thought Roe v Wade was untouchable, too. And I don’t believe the mechanism for changing or overriding the Constitution exempts the Bill of Rights.
As for if it’s needless, unnecessary, appropriate or warranted, we’ll have to agree to disagree - I’ll give you “extreme” and “(im)practical”, though.
Again, fair enough. We can agree to disagree.
