IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags ICE issues , media criticism , the Harvard Crimson

Reply
Old 24th October 2019, 10:27 AM   #1
Graham2001
Graduate Poster
 
Graham2001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,697
Harvard Crimson: Yes, we should ask for comment from ICE

I found this editorial from the Harvard Crimson quite interesting, the crux of the issue seems to be this:


Quote:
Last month, The Crimson covered a rally organized by campus group Act on a Dream that called for the abolition of United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement. During the course of our reporting, Crimson reporters requested comment from ICE — a decision that has proved controversial with many of our readers. We stand behind that decision, and we wanted to share with you our thinking.


...


After the protest had concluded, but before the story was published, The Crimson contacted an ICE spokesperson to ask if they wished to provide a statement in response to the protest.


...


A few days after the event, Act on a Dream and others expressed disagreement with The Crimson’s request for comment to ICE. It is our practice to meet with student groups whenever they have questions or concerns about our coverage, and — as a result — we contacted Act on a Dream shortly after seeing their criticisms on social media. We met with them to listen to their concerns and share our perspective by explaining our policies and the fundamental journalistic principles behind them.


A week later, Act on a Dream published a petition calling on The Crimson to change its policies so that it never contacts ICE for comment again and apologize for the “harm [it] inflicted on the undocumented community.” In this, the organization has called on other student groups to boycott speaking to The Crimson until the paper complies with their demands.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2...s-ice-comment/


As with the authors of the editorial, I thought it was standard practice to contact the subjects of an article (or the focus of a protest covered in an article.) for comment and they have the right the refuse such comment.


The idea that the subject of an article (or the focus of a protest covered in an article.) should not be contacted because reading or hearing their words will 'cause harm' seems wrongheaded.
__________________
"I need hard facts! Bring in the dowsers!"
'America Unearthed' Season 1, Episode 13: Hunt for the Holy Grail

Everybody gets it wrong sometimes...
Graham2001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 10:51 AM   #2
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
There seems to be a bit of this going around lately. "The time for conversation and hearing all sides is over. The time for silencing and suppressing is now!"
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 11:56 AM   #3
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 28,589
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
There seems to be a bit of this going around lately. "The time for conversation and hearing all sides is over. The time for silencing and suppressing is now!"
Do you think ICE, the federal government agency, has free-speech rights that are being silenced and suppressed by not asking them for comment about a student protest?
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 12:25 PM   #4
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,726
I don't really know how likely a government agency with a kickass acronym for a name, that helps run concentration camps, is to respond to comment requests from a student newspaper, but this strikes me as a common courtesy for public officials, government departments, and anyone else with a RP office.

I won't say Act on a Dream has no right to object to this practice, and I can see why they would - immigration enforcement is particularly ugly under this administration - but I don't see why the Crimson staff should simply give in either...
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 12:48 PM   #5
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 16,202
Originally Posted by Graham2001 View Post
As with the authors of the editorial, I thought it was standard practice to contact the subjects of an article (or the focus of a protest covered in an article.) for comment and they have the right the refuse such comment.

The idea that the subject of an article (or the focus of a protest covered in an article.) should not be contacted because reading or hearing their words will 'cause harm' seems wrongheaded.

It's a fundamental principle of journalism to get all sides to every story, regardless of how wrong or bigoted or tasteless any particular side may be. How one communicates those sides can obviously vary depending on perspective, and one can easily slant a story that way; but refusal to do so is to abandon journalism entirely in favour of producing propaganda.
__________________
When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won.

Last edited by luchog; 24th October 2019 at 12:52 PM.
luchog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 12:49 PM   #6
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 12,511
Of course the Crimson should have called for comment. The agency's answer could have been quite revealing. Sometimes the agency just makes things worse for itself with their comment. It's sad that anyone is discouraging the process. You *want* to give these people a chance to justify their practices, so readers will understand who they are.

Unlike a lot of people here I haven't made up my mind that ICE are evil, uniquely among law enforcement. I may detest a particular mission, but I can see why we need immigration enforcement. Maybe it's worth reorganizing and rebranding if the culture is particularly toxic, but you're never going to get rid of the actual mission; someone will still do that job.

There is maybe not quite as strong a feeling that articles *must* get a comment or a refusal out of an agency, but it's only fair. You might not feel required to bend over backwards with repeated calls etc., because online is different than print; comment can always be added later if the agency sees it can't just let an accusation hang there. But you should always try, and always update a story if you get a belated comment, or even a pro forma refusal to comment. It's a horrible precedent not to.

Last edited by Minoosh; 24th October 2019 at 12:51 PM.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 01:20 PM   #7
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 28,589
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
I don't really know how likely a government agency with a kickass acronym for a name, that helps run concentration camps, is to respond to comment requests from a student newspaper, but this strikes me as a common courtesy for public officials, government departments, and anyone else with a RP office.

I won't say Act on a Dream has no right to object to this practice, and I can see why they would - immigration enforcement is particularly ugly under this administration - but I don't see why the Crimson staff should simply give in either...
For what it's worth I agree completely; theprestige's specific objection just struck me as particularly silly.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 02:07 PM   #8
CORed
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 10,589
While I certainly don't approve of much of what ICE is doing under the current administration, I see calls for the abolition of ICE as much like calls for the abolition of the IRS: The job they do is a necessary one, and another agency with a different name, but most likely a lot of the same people, will have to be created to replace them. It will, in effect, be not much more than a name change.
CORed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 02:14 PM   #9
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
For what it's worth I agree completely; theprestige's specific objection just struck me as particularly silly.
The silliness seems to be entirely non sequitur on your part.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 02:53 PM   #10
Graham2001
Graduate Poster
 
Graham2001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,697
The story seems to be getting wider interest. NBC and the Washington Post along with several right wing pundits are now talking about it.


Here is the Washington Posts article:


https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...back-students/


In it is a great response from one of the reporters at the New York Times:


Quote:
“This type of journalistic transparency and moral clarity, even in the face of criticism that may seem overbaked, is something all newsroom leaders can learn from,” said New York Times reporter Astead W. Herndon
__________________
"I need hard facts! Bring in the dowsers!"
'America Unearthed' Season 1, Episode 13: Hunt for the Holy Grail

Everybody gets it wrong sometimes...
Graham2001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 02:59 PM   #11
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 60,375
Originally Posted by CORed View Post
While I certainly don't approve of much of what ICE is doing under the current administration, I see calls for the abolition of ICE as much like calls for the abolition of the IRS: The job they do is a necessary one, and another agency with a different name, but most likely a lot of the same people, will have to be created to replace them. It will, in effect, be not much more than a name change.
Pretty much this,unless you advocate scraping all immigratation laws, only a few extremists advocate.
But ,yeah, ICE needs to be purged of it's current leadership.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 03:30 PM   #12
Graham2001
Graduate Poster
 
Graham2001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,697
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Pretty much this,unless you advocate scraping all immigratation laws, only a few extremists advocate.
But ,yeah, ICE needs to be purged of it's current leadership.

All well and good, but at the moment the actual issue is that there are people who seem to have confused advocacy journalism with general journalism, or worse, think that journalists should only say/do things pleasing to them.
__________________
"I need hard facts! Bring in the dowsers!"
'America Unearthed' Season 1, Episode 13: Hunt for the Holy Grail

Everybody gets it wrong sometimes...
Graham2001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 03:43 PM   #13
Max_mang
Muse
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 524
Originally Posted by Graham2001 View Post
All well and good, but at the moment the actual issue is that there are people who seem to have confused advocacy journalism with general journalism, or worse, think that journalists should only say/do things pleasing to them.
Exactly, not sure why people are talking about whether they approve of ICE or not.
Max_mang is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 03:46 PM   #14
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 12,511
I think it's telling that the Crimson learned about Act on a Dream's complaint from social media. Did it not occur to the group to contact the Crimson directly? Or would that have given them less scope to use the complaint to spark a round of indignation? That doesn't really hold up either; they could have done both. This tendency to air grievances on social media while seemingly making no effort to just call up the paper and ask about the policy is not a good trend IMO. It would have been simple to do that. It tells me they weren't interested in learning more about the way reporting works; the point was complaining, not trying to understand the process. Oh well. That's their right, but it's a lazy way to do things: Complain publicly without bothering to engage with the subject of their criticism. Why temper your indignation with understanding? It's simpler to just present one side of the story.

It seems like a bizarre complaint to me. The paper called ICE for comment ? I'm not sure why they even care. If I can get past paywall I'll read the Post story.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 03:52 PM   #15
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
I think it's telling that the Crimson learned about Act on a Dream's complaint from social media. Did it not occur to the group to contact the Crimson directly? Or would that have given them less scope to use the complaint to spark a round of indignation? That doesn't really hold up either; they could have done both. This tendency to air grievances on social media while seemingly making no effort to just call up the paper and ask about the policy is not a good trend IMO. It would have been simple to do that. It tells me they weren't interested in learning more about the way reporting works; the point was complaining, not trying to understand the process. Oh well. That's their right, but it's a lazy way to do things: Complain publicly without bothering to engage with the subject of their criticism. Why temper your indignation with understanding? It's simpler to just present one side of the story.

It seems like a bizarre complaint to me. The paper called ICE for comment ? I'm not sure why they even care. If I can get past paywall I'll read the Post story.
I don't think AD needed to talk to the Crimson. Their goal was to boycott the Crimson. For that, going straight to social media is the obvious choice. Talking to the Crimson just muddies the water with the paper's side of the story, and just confuses the target audience into thinking maybe the boycott isn't justified.

Kind of like how the Crimson trying to get ICE's side of the story risked undermining AD and confusing their narrative. This isn't about resolving a disagreement about proper reportage. This is all about getting your side of the story out there, avoiding alternative viewpoints as much as possible, and punishing anyone who gets in the way of that program however you can.

Last edited by theprestige; 24th October 2019 at 03:54 PM.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 04:12 PM   #16
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 12,511
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I don't think AD needed to talk to the Crimson. Their goal was to boycott the Crimson. For that, going straight to social media is the obvious choice. Talking to the Crimson just muddies the water with the paper's side of the story, and just confuses the target audience into thinking maybe the boycott isn't justified.
Right. I get that, but they could have done both. What's the point of a boycott? Do they want the Crimson to un-call ICE? It just seems like a silly thing to protest over. They did succeed in calling attention to themselves, though, so maybe the Crimson did them a favor by calling ICE and giving them something to complain about.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 04:38 PM   #17
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,726
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
For what it's worth I agree completely; theprestige's specific objection just struck me as particularly silly.
I'm not too concerned with what he says, so I was more commenting on the OP.

deep breath

So...let's be clear - the actual problem starts at the top, with Dolt 45. I have far less issue with the Obama-era policy of ICE concentrating on immigrants who have committed major crimes. And ICE isn't the group that patrols borders and separating families there - that's, um, Border Patrol, and man y of them hate doing it.

However, Dolt 45's (and really, white nationalists like Steven Miller's) "zero tolerance" policy has led to parents being deported while their children are at school with no home to go back to, a major increase in sanctuary cities as governments try to reassure immigrants that they needn't worry about reporting crimes the witness or are harmed by, and so forth.

(I'll also note that I prefer penalizing supposedly rich companies that hire undocumented immigrants, but Dolt 45 own several such companies, so that's why he prefers his "torture the spics" approach to anything rational. Well, that and his white supremacism of course.)

But a lot of these distinctions get lost when people discuss immigration in general, particularly since ICE is the group that raids workplaces, churches, harasses people right outside courtrooms, and the like. It makes sense to help readers to understand these distinctions. I also note that the Crimson gave ICE no info on anyone they could harass or haul off. In short, I see no real issue - but protesting is almost a standard part of college life, so I'm not offended by that, either.
Mumbles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 04:43 PM   #18
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
Right. I get that, but they could have done both. What's the point of a boycott?
To punish the Crimson for trying to get the other side of the story.

Quote:
Do they want the Crimson to un-call ICE?
They want the Crimson to think twice, the next time they think about trying to get the other side of the story. And they want everyone else who's watching to get that same message.

Quote:
It just seems like a silly thing to protest over.
Silly, yes. But also deadly serious.

Quote:
They did succeed in calling attention to themselves, though, so maybe the Crimson did them a favor by calling ICE and giving them something to complain about.
I'm sure they see it that way. They're probably not wrong, either.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 04:55 PM   #19
Pterodactyl
Graduate Poster
 
Pterodactyl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,280
Originally Posted by CORed View Post
While I certainly don't approve of much of what ICE is doing under the current administration, I see calls for the abolition of ICE as much like calls for the abolition of the IRS: The job they do is a necessary one, and another agency with a different name, but most likely a lot of the same people, will have to be created to replace them. It will, in effect, be not much more than a name change.
Indeed.

Taking this a step further, an agency can comment to its specific mission and strategy, but its ultimate goals are determined legislatively. Having an issue with an agency, specifically, doesn't make a lot of sense, because they're just implementing the laws/rules those elected have assigned.
Pterodactyl is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 04:56 PM   #20
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 28,589
Originally Posted by CORed View Post
While I certainly don't approve of much of what ICE is doing under the current administration, I see calls for the abolition of ICE as much like calls for the abolition of the IRS: The job they do is a necessary one, and another agency with a different name, but most likely a lot of the same people, will have to be created to replace them. It will, in effect, be not much more than a name change.
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Pretty much this,unless you advocate scraping all immigratation laws, only a few extremists advocate.
But ,yeah, ICE needs to be purged of it's current leadership.
Strictly speaking, those who advocate "abolishing ICE" do advocate that a replacement agency be created, not that those functions should be abandoned entirely - or at least that's my impression.

The feeling is that racism and anti-immigrant (not merely pro-immigration-law-enforcement) attitudes generally have suffused through the agency so thoroughly from top to bottom, that just changing a few bureaucrats at the organizational leadership level is no longer sufficient to solve the problem. ICE is the kind of agency that, like most law-enforcement agencies, is more or less continuously hiring due to turnover; and I don't think it's really controversial to believe that this administration's open racism and contempt for immigrants has attracted numbers of people with certain attitudes to apply, who obviously the current agency is not going to feel compelled to screen out. When the leaders are replaced, the boots on the ground will stay the same, and you can't change a culture with a memo.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 06:11 PM   #21
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 12,511
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
To punish the Crimson for trying to get the other side of the story.
I don’t know. I need to read more. If you call an agency asking them to respond to complaints that they shouldn’t exist you’re probably not going to get a juicy quote unless the person in PR is having a really bad day and they make a smartass retort. Either way it’s not going to make the agency look good; it’s not going to make protesters look bad. They just sound ignorant to me. But I’m basing that only on what’s posted in this thread, and I may be wrong.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 06:53 PM   #22
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 28,963
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Do you think ICE, the federal government agency, has free-speech rights that are being silenced and suppressed by not asking them for comment about a student protest?
It's about proper journalistic practice, not violating anyone's free speech rights, technically.

There's no constitutional "right to be asked for comment" that I'm aware of, but it is a convention that many newspapers and other news organizations follow. When this convention isn't followed, mistakes tend to happen. Bad reporting happens. Reporters and their news organizations may end up with egg on their face.

I think the silly part is the protestors demand that the Crimson not follow established journalistic practice in reporting the story. And their objection that asking ICE for comment somehow puts the protesters in danger doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th October 2019, 07:10 PM   #23
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
I don’t know. I need to read more. If you call an agency asking them to respond to complaints that they shouldn’t exist you’re probably not going to get a juicy quote unless the person in PR is having a really bad day and they make a smartass retort. Either way it’s not going to make the agency look good; it’s not going to make protesters look bad. They just sound ignorant to me. But I’m basing that only on what’s posted in this thread, and I may be wrong.
It's not about whether it would have produced anything. It's about the fact that they even considered doing it at all. That's what AD is trying to nip in the bud.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2019, 04:07 PM   #24
Graham2001
Graduate Poster
 
Graham2001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,697
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
But a lot of these distinctions get lost when people discuss immigration in general, particularly since ICE is the group that raids workplaces, churches, harasses people right outside courtrooms, and the like. It makes sense to help readers to understand these distinctions. I also note that the Crimson gave ICE no info on anyone they could harass or haul off. In short, I see no real issue - but protesting is almost a standard part of college life, so I'm not offended by that, either.

Sadly the Harvard Undergraduate Council is not so understanding.


Quote:
Harvard’s Undergraduate Council voted to pass a statement at its meeting Sunday in support of immigration advocacy group Act on a Dream’s concerns about The Harvard Crimson’s news policies and made recommendations to make reporting policies more transparent.


...


The council’s vote approved its own statement regarding the issue to be sent out to students in its weekly email.


“The Undergraduate Council stands in solidarity with the concerns of Act on a Dream, undocumented students, and other marginalized individuals on campus,” the statement reads. “It is necessary for the Undergraduate Council to acknowledge the concerns raised by numerous groups and students on campus over the past few weeks and to recognize the validity of their expressed fear and feelings of unsafety.”

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2...-supports-aod/
__________________
"I need hard facts! Bring in the dowsers!"
'America Unearthed' Season 1, Episode 13: Hunt for the Holy Grail

Everybody gets it wrong sometimes...
Graham2001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2019, 04:39 PM   #25
xjx388
Moderator
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 11,360
Given this assault on good journalism and the assaults on fundamental rights by student groups . . . I can only conclude that the youth have gone crazy and the country is heading to a very bad place where the 1st Amendment means nothing.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2019, 05:01 PM   #26
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 20,571
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
I don't really know how likely a government agency with a kickass acronym for a name, that helps run concentration camps, is to respond to comment requests from a student newspaper, but this strikes me as a common courtesy for public officials, government departments, and anyone else with a RP office.
It's not common courtesy. It's Journalism 101.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2019, 05:04 PM   #27
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 16,202
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
I can only conclude that the youth have gone crazy and the country is heading to a very bad place

The cry of reactionaries in every single generation that sees substantial social change. The kids of today just don't respect the beliefs of their elders and betters.

Funny how the only parts of the country that are in a bad place are the parts governed by reactionaries. The kids seem to be doing pretty well aside from that.
__________________
When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won.
luchog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2019, 07:40 PM   #28
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 28,963
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
. . . I can only conclude that the youth have gone crazy and the country is heading to a very bad place . . .
Here it comes ...

























Wait for it ...






















OK Boomer!!!!

Bwahahahahaha!!!1!!
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2019, 08:36 PM   #29
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 28,963
Originally Posted by Graham2001 View Post
Sadly the Harvard Undergraduate Council is not so understanding.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2...-supports-aod/
After reading the story, in the end it's just a symbolic statement of support with no actual practical effect. It "acknowledge[s] the concerns" and "recognize[s] the validity" of their feelings. And it barely managed to gather a plurality of support among the student council:

Quote:
The statement, passed 15-13-4
And the people who sponsored it emphasized that it wasn't really meant to be a criticism of The Crimson but more a statement of support for "marginalized" students.

Quote:
Johnstone said he and Urbina wrote the legislation in response to student requests for a UC statement in support of undocumented students.

“We think it’s really important that we amplify student voices on campus, especially those that are often marginalized,” Johnstone said. “We’re not attacking The Crimson at the same time. We just think they need to come together and come up with a sensible solution.”

Urbina said at the meeting that the council’s statement is not a call to boycott The Crimson.

“This statement does not mention the boycott whatsoever,” Urbina said. “It is simply a stepping stone that we recognize the concerns of Act on a Dream and undocumented students on campus, and we can begin and continue having conversations with these groups and finding solutions.”

Some council members, such as UC Vice President Julia M. Huesa ’20, said they are concerned the vote may be construed as “commenting on what the press does” and an attempt at censorship. Other students, such as Elm Yard Representative Phillip Meng ’23, called the statement “vague” and said they are not sure exactly what stance the statement is taking.
The wording of the statement does sound a wee bit patronizing and vague to me. It's not a full-throated articulation of a position on either side of the issue, really. When you say that you "acknowledge" someone's concerns, that's really not quite the same thing as saying that you agree with them 100%. When you tell someone that their feelings are "valid" that sounds like something a therapist might say, which seems a bit patronizing as I mentioned earlier.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2019, 09:02 PM   #30
xjx388
Moderator
 
xjx388's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 11,360
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
Here it comes ...



Wait for it ...



Ok Boomer!!!!



Bwahahahahaha!!!1!!
I knew that was coming!

Originally Posted by luchog View Post
The cry of reactionaries in every single generation that sees substantial social change. The kids of today just don't respect the beliefs of their elders and betters.
So I guess that confirms it...I am viewed as a reactionary.

Anyway.

I get it. I was being a little over the top there. And maybe the youth of today are right. Maybe the USA is just a little bit too free. I mean it’s possible that Freedom of the Press and Freedom of Speech are overblown Freedoms and there’s a good argument for allowing more restrictions.

I’d like to hear that argument because I don’t think the youth of today are making a good case. Certainly this “Harvard Crimson don’t get a statement from ICE,” thing is not a good argument.


Quote:
Funny how the only parts of the country that are in a bad place are the parts governed by reactionaries. The kids seem to be doing pretty well aside from that.
The kids are not alright, as shown by this incident and the others making news lately. They are all up in arms because a newspaper asked for comment from the other side of the story? Really?
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th November 2019, 10:11 AM   #31
Seismosaurus
Philosopher
 
Seismosaurus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 6,092
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
There seems to be a bit of this going around lately. "The time for conversation and hearing all sides is over. The time for silencing and suppressing is now!"
Not sure if that's more common lately, or if it's just being applied more to people it previously wasn't.

I mean, the battles for equal treatment of women and minorities were (and still are) frequently met with "shut up about it", "now isn't the time", "don't push", etc, yes? So is this really a new thing?
__________________
Promise of diamonds in eyes of coal
She carries beauty in her soul
Seismosaurus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:38 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.