[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

COVID-19 - Ohmsen - Oct 1, 2020 - 3:44pm
 
2020 Elections - R_P - Oct 1, 2020 - 3:33pm
 
Radio Paradise Comments - haresfur - Oct 1, 2020 - 3:16pm
 
Shipping News - haresfur - Oct 1, 2020 - 3:07pm
 
Trump - black321 - Oct 1, 2020 - 3:02pm
 
Radio Paradise NFL Pick'em Group - islander - Oct 1, 2020 - 1:27pm
 
Military Matters - Red_Dragon - Oct 1, 2020 - 1:13pm
 
China - R_P - Oct 1, 2020 - 12:24pm
 
Twitter's finest moment - miamizsun - Oct 1, 2020 - 12:12pm
 
NASA & other news from space - Red_Dragon - Oct 1, 2020 - 11:59am
 
Name My Band - Antigone - Oct 1, 2020 - 10:47am
 
Memorials - Remembering Our Loved Ones - miamizsun - Oct 1, 2020 - 9:13am
 
Looting & vandalism isn't protest - Red_Dragon - Oct 1, 2020 - 8:18am
 
Bluesound Sound Dropouts - BillG - Oct 1, 2020 - 7:33am
 
Problems with RP on BluOS in the UK - BillG - Oct 1, 2020 - 7:33am
 
Amazon Echo/Alexa stream not working - BillG - Oct 1, 2020 - 7:11am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - jarro - Oct 1, 2020 - 5:52am
 
FLAC Streaming - jarro - Oct 1, 2020 - 5:46am
 
Trump Lies - haresfur - Sep 30, 2020 - 9:46pm
 
Climate Change - R_P - Sep 30, 2020 - 4:35pm
 
New Music - Lazy8 - Sep 30, 2020 - 1:47pm
 
Fox Spews - Red_Dragon - Sep 30, 2020 - 11:00am
 
Nigeria - cc_rider - Sep 30, 2020 - 9:45am
 
The Obituary Page - ScottFromWyoming - Sep 30, 2020 - 8:53am
 
American Justice - Red_Dragon - Sep 30, 2020 - 7:26am
 
What Did You Do Today? - miamizsun - Sep 30, 2020 - 6:46am
 
p4jkafla's personal thread because she is mean or kicks p... - haresfur - Sep 30, 2020 - 3:13am
 
Baseball, anyone? - ScottFromWyoming - Sep 29, 2020 - 8:41pm
 
Amazing animals! - kcar - Sep 29, 2020 - 8:00pm
 
Music Videos - Steely_D - Sep 29, 2020 - 7:58pm
 
What The Hell Buddy? - Red_Dragon - Sep 29, 2020 - 6:37pm
 
Media Bias - Ohmsen - Sep 29, 2020 - 5:12pm
 
Breaking News - Steely_D - Sep 29, 2020 - 4:54pm
 
Business as Usual - R_P - Sep 29, 2020 - 1:25pm
 
RP Daily Trivia Challenge - ScottFromWyoming - Sep 29, 2020 - 1:16pm
 
Coffee - Steely_D - Sep 29, 2020 - 1:09pm
 
what the hell, miamizsun? - miamizsun - Sep 29, 2020 - 12:20pm
 
Modern - ScottFromWyoming - Sep 29, 2020 - 11:02am
 
It's the economy stupid. - rgio - Sep 29, 2020 - 9:18am
 
Lyrics That Remind You of Someone - oldviolin - Sep 29, 2020 - 8:56am
 
RP App for Android - bevgerry - Sep 29, 2020 - 8:29am
 
Race in America - cc_rider - Sep 29, 2020 - 8:16am
 
Counting with Pictures - Proclivities - Sep 29, 2020 - 7:46am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Sep 29, 2020 - 5:17am
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - Alchemist - Sep 28, 2020 - 11:58pm
 
Crazy conspiracy theories - ScottFromWyoming - Sep 28, 2020 - 6:38pm
 
Dial 1 for English - kcar - Sep 28, 2020 - 4:58pm
 
Supreme Court: Who's Next? - Steely_D - Sep 28, 2020 - 3:55pm
 
Things You Thought Today - ScottN - Sep 28, 2020 - 1:47pm
 
FLAC via TuneIn - Steely_D - Sep 28, 2020 - 11:35am
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - VV - Sep 28, 2020 - 3:06am
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - kurtster - Sep 27, 2020 - 8:02pm
 
The American Dream - Red_Dragon - Sep 27, 2020 - 4:02pm
 
Live Music - R_P - Sep 27, 2020 - 2:50pm
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - haresfur - Sep 27, 2020 - 2:33pm
 
Classical Music - R_P - Sep 27, 2020 - 12:14pm
 
KUDOS for BillG - miamizsun - Sep 27, 2020 - 9:04am
 
What are you reading now? - rhahl - Sep 27, 2020 - 7:48am
 
RightWingNutZ - Red_Dragon - Sep 26, 2020 - 4:27pm
 
Khruangbin - Red_Dragon - Sep 26, 2020 - 3:36pm
 
Strips, cartoons, illustrations - R_P - Sep 26, 2020 - 2:19pm
 
How's the weather? - westslope - Sep 26, 2020 - 7:20am
 
Integration of RP app with Apple Music playlists - BillG - Sep 25, 2020 - 12:14pm
 
Canada - westslope - Sep 25, 2020 - 12:03pm
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Sep 25, 2020 - 10:58am
 
This is Odd, Gross and a good excuse to be late for work - miamizsun - Sep 25, 2020 - 10:08am
 
Drop the Puck! NHL Lockout Ends! - sunybuny - Sep 25, 2020 - 5:35am
 
Mixtape Culture Club - KurtfromLaQuinta - Sep 24, 2020 - 4:32pm
 
Animal Resistance - R_P - Sep 24, 2020 - 4:13pm
 
Language - Ohmsen - Sep 24, 2020 - 10:12am
 
• • • BRING OUT YOUR DEAD • • •  - miamizsun - Sep 24, 2020 - 5:59am
 
Film & Video Production - rgio - Sep 24, 2020 - 5:11am
 
Quotes: Your Favorite Comedians - Ohmsen - Sep 24, 2020 - 1:07am
 
Questions. - whatshisname - Sep 23, 2020 - 7:10pm
 
Your favourite conspiracy theory? - R_P - Sep 23, 2020 - 4:56pm
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Freedom of speech? Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Post to this Topic
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: May 25, 2018 - 12:21pm

 sirdroseph wrote:
(...) the NFL does not give a rats ass what Trump or anybody else other than paying customers think. (...)
 
I find that hard to believe, since any brand is sensitive to negative publicity. And nobody has produced quite the negativity (while cloaking themselves in 'patriotism') as Trump and Pence have (they do have somewhat high profiles and a media that reports every single word they say):

Trump turned the debate into a campaign issue , saying the NFL should fire any player who takes a knee during "The Star-Spangled Banner." The NFL hasn't gone that far, but Kaepernick and Reid believe they are being singled out as leaders in the movement.

Both have filed collusion grievances against the NFL .

There was no immediate comment from Trump on the new policy, but Vice President Mike Pence called it "a win for the fans, a win for (Trump), and a win for America." Last season, Pence walked out of game at Indianapolis after some players kneeled during the anthem.

"Americans can once again come together around what unites us — our flag, our military, and our National Anthem. Thank you NFL," Pence tweeted, adding the hashtag "ProudToStand."


sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Yes
Gender: Male


Posted: May 25, 2018 - 12:17pm

 Proclivities wrote:

Keep in mind: the fans are not the "paying customers" that the NFL derives the majority its money from.  The NFL receives something like 65% of its income from TV broadcasters, who derive their income from advertisers (though many advertisers and manufacturers do deal directly with the league or with the the teams).  Now that more people can skip the ads via DVR, the cable stations charge for expensive sports bundles in order to pay the NFL.  Ticket sales are a small part of the overall income, but ultimately, whether or not people are actually watching the games, and overall public opinion does determine the income of the league.

 




True, the overriding point is appeasing income sources is all the NFL is concerned with. They are not interested in justice, politics, nationalism, patriotism or any of that only in the context of how it profits them. Same could be said with the close alliance to the military, it is all public relations.
Proclivities

Proclivities Avatar

Location: Paris of the Piedmont
Gender: Male


Posted: May 25, 2018 - 12:08pm

 sirdroseph wrote:
 R_P wrote:

Riiiiiight.

 
I stand by this. Unless Trump is behind the scenes affecting their money in some way, but the NFL does not give a rats ass what Trump or anybody else other than paying customers think. Now he could have an indirect effect on the bottom line if his zealot followers are large enough in number to boycott the NFL or not based upon his opinions, but hard to gauge the data on that. But trust me the NFL only cares about Trump if he affects their bottom line. This is all about money.

 
Keep in mind: the fans are not the "paying customers" that the NFL derives the majority its money from.  The NFL receives something like 65% of its income from TV broadcasters, who derive their income from advertisers (though many advertisers and manufacturers do deal directly with the league or with the the teams).  Now that more people can skip the ads via DVR, the cable stations charge for expensive sports bundles in order to pay the NFL.  Ticket sales are a small part of the overall income, but ultimately, whether or not people are actually watching the games, and overall public opinion does determine the income of the league.
sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Yes
Gender: Male


Posted: May 25, 2018 - 12:06pm

 SeriousLee wrote:

Ya. I doubt very much the NFL made a decision based on anything Trump may have said or done. But I think it does go beyond just what the paying customer thinks. Public opinion does factor in, I believe, in this case. Especially since it concerns the flag and the anthem.

Just my two cents. Now I need to get back to my rum. {#Cheers}

 




Absolutely that is what I was saying public opinion is dollars and cents.
SeriousLee

SeriousLee Avatar

Location: Dans l'milieu d'deux milles livres


Posted: May 25, 2018 - 11:56am

 sirdroseph wrote:
 R_P wrote:

Riiiiiight.

 


I stand by this. Unless Trump is behind the scenes affecting their money in some way, but the NFL does not give a rats ass what Trump or anybody else other than paying customers think. Now he could have an indirect effect on the bottom line if his zealot followers are large enough in number to boycott the NFL or not based upon his opinions, but hard to gauge the data on that. But trust me the NFL only cares about Trump if he affects their bottom line. This is all about money.

 
Ya. I doubt very much the NFL made a decision based on anything Trump may have said or done. But I think it does go beyond just what the paying customer thinks. Public opinion does factor in, I believe, in this case. Especially since it concerns the flag and the anthem.

Just my two cents. Now I need to get back to my rum. {#Cheers}
sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Yes
Gender: Male


Posted: May 25, 2018 - 11:47am

 R_P wrote:

Riiiiiight.

 




I stand by this. Unless Trump is behind the scenes affecting their money in some way, but the NFL does not give a rats ass what Trump or anybody else other than paying customers think. Now he could have an indirect effect on the bottom line if his zealot followers are large enough in number to boycott the NFL or not based upon his opinions, but hard to gauge the data on that. But trust me the NFL only cares about Trump if he affects their bottom line. This is all about money.
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: May 25, 2018 - 11:30am

 sirdroseph wrote:
but the NFL policy change has absolutely nothing to do with the Trump
 
Riiiiiight.
sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Yes
Gender: Male


Posted: May 25, 2018 - 10:40am

 Red_Dragon wrote:


 




Again, this would only be a relevant comparison if the US government proclaimed that it is unlawful for the players not to stand for the national anthem which of course they are not and cannot according to our constitution. This is simply about the business that is the NFL losing money because enough of the fans i.e. customers do not like the image and are turning away apparently in droves to illicit such a drastic response from the corporation. Now, you can point the finger of blame at the fan base for this reaction, but the NFL policy change has absolutely nothing to do with the Trump, the US government, free speech or even the issues the players wish to spotlight by not standing in the first place other than the fan base don't like them doing it. If the fan base didn't care neither would the NFL. Believe me they would rather all of this just go away which is why I think they have made a terribly unwise business decision that will come back to bite them and everyone else associated with the NFL including the players. Personally I think the fans that are so offended by these protest are indeed hypocritical, but the NFL does not care about my opinion, they only care if I am still watching.
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar



Posted: May 25, 2018 - 6:50am


maryte

maryte Avatar

Location: Blinding You With Library Science!
Gender: Female


Posted: May 24, 2018 - 11:14am

 islander wrote:

How our national dialog should have gone.  I really have trouble getting the perspective of people seeing taking a knee as dis-respective. It is respectful in every other circumstance, and certainly better than 'sitting it out'.  I have trouble with the 'with us or against us' view, especially when it leads to patriotism is only done 'this way'. We should be upholding values, not symbols.

 

When it becomes "with us or against us," that's when you know it's moved from patriotism to nationalism - next stop, fascism.
islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: May 24, 2018 - 10:46am

 cc_rider wrote:

It's a really nice story. Nate Boyer is the Green Beret. He left college at Texas, then came back after his service and finished his eligibility. By all accounts a very classy guy who brought a lot of wisdom to the team. His open letter could have been full of vitriol, instead he sought understanding and common ground.

Separate anecdote: in the locker room before a game, some dignitary came in to give them a pep talk. Well, the person said something like 'This isn't just football, this is war!' That didn't sit too well with Mr. Boyer, and he called the guy out. Having been in combat, he politely explained the differences. Class.
c.

 
How our national dialog should have gone.  I really have trouble getting the perspective of people seeing taking a knee as dis-respective. It is respectful in every other circumstance, and certainly better than 'sitting it out'.  I have trouble with the 'with us or against us' view, especially when it leads to patriotism is only done 'this way'. We should be upholding values, not symbols.
cc_rider

cc_rider Avatar

Location: Bastrop
Gender: Male


Posted: May 24, 2018 - 10:20am

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

Except that by standing—anyone, standing—for the anthem, addressing the flag with hand over heart, we/they are saying *something*. They are being forced to stand up and speak in front of cameras that they have no problem with our country at the moment, everything's great. Kaepernick originally just sat on the bench, rather than participate in that. An ex-military teammate hinted that that was disrespectful and suggested taking a knee; respect the flag, don't participate in the charade.

The NFL policy will allow Kaep et al to remain in the locker room during the anthem; if they'd had the option before, I suspect Kaepernick would have just sat it out.

 
It's a really nice story. Nate Boyer is the Green Beret. He left college at Texas, then came back after his service and finished his eligibility. By all accounts a very classy guy who brought a lot of wisdom to the team. His open letter could have been full of vitriol, instead he sought understanding and common ground.

Separate anecdote: in the locker room before a game, some dignitary came in to give them a pep talk. Well, the person said something like 'This isn't just football, this is war!' That didn't sit too well with Mr. Boyer, and he called the guy out. Having been in combat, he politely explained the differences. Class.
c.
R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: May 24, 2018 - 10:08am

 islander wrote:
I'm still wondering why we do the national anthem at sports games, and why it's mostly the athletes participation we focus on.  

a) if it's just entertainment, why don't we have the anthem at movies, and before tv shows, or concerts?

b) If it's bad for the athletes to take a knee, why is it okay for Average Joe, to grab a beer?  Shouldn't concessions be closed down?  Also restrooms.  At home I'm sure everyone in the living room is standing with their hats off and hands over their hearts right?
 
Don't give them more ideas.
islander

islander Avatar

Location: Seattle
Gender: Male


Posted: May 24, 2018 - 10:01am

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

Except that by standing—anyone, standing—for the anthem, addressing the flag with hand over heart, we/they are saying *something*. They are being forced to stand up and speak in front of cameras that they have no problem with our country at the moment, everything's great. Kaepernick originally just sat on the bench, rather than participate in that. An ex-military teammate hinted that that was disrespectful and suggested taking a knee; respect the flag, don't participate in the charade.

The NFL policy will allow Kaep et al to remain in the locker room during the anthem; if they'd had the option before, I suspect Kaepernick would have just sat it out.

 
I'm still wondering why we do the national anthem at sports games, and why it's mostly the athletes participation we focus on.  

a) if it's just entertainment, why don't we have the anthem at movies, and before tv shows, or concerts?

b) If it's bad for the athletes to take a knee, why is it okay for Average Joe, to grab a beer?  Shouldn't concessions be closed down?  Also restrooms.  At home I'm sure everyone in the living room is standing with their hats off and hands over their hearts right?
ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: May 24, 2018 - 6:14am

 sirdroseph wrote:

Everyone is messing this whole thing up and missing the point, this is not or should not even be a free speech issue at all. What it should be is an employer/employee conflict that has nothing to do with free speech. 

 
Except that by standing—anyone, standing—for the anthem, addressing the flag with hand over heart, we/they are saying *something*. They are being forced to stand up and speak in front of cameras that they have no problem with our country at the moment, everything's great. Kaepernick originally just sat on the bench, rather than participate in that. An ex-military teammate hinted that that was disrespectful and suggested taking a knee; respect the flag, don't participate in the charade.

The NFL policy will allow Kaep et al to remain in the locker room during the anthem; if they'd had the option before, I suspect Kaepernick would have just sat it out.
sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Yes
Gender: Male


Posted: May 24, 2018 - 5:35am

 R_P wrote:


 





Everyone is messing this whole thing up and missing the point, this is not or should not even be a free speech issue at all. What it should be is an employer/employee conflict that has nothing to do with free speech. Of course the players should be able to protest the anthem all they want........on their own time. If the NFL does not want them protesting the anthem then they have every right to enforce this rule as they please. I don't think it is a wise business move to handle it this way, but they have the right to do so just as your employer has the right to fire you if you call your boss an asshole to his face. You have every right to do so and your employer has every right to fire you for doing this as well. What the NFL should do if they were smart and they're not, is just quit playing the anthem before games. Seems like a silly out dated jingoistic practice anyway. Either way, they are all going down because the GAME has become a business and political theatre for the employees and I for one being a lifelong NFL fan and historian as a child have totally lost interest and have stopped watching. And to be clear, I have not stopped watching for political reasons, I understand and support the reason why the players are doing this even though I do not think it is actually helping their cause mostly because of the reasons I stated before. The very people the players are trying to reach are never going to listen now because they are viewing it purely through the short sighted jingoistic prism of disrespect to the anthem and are being guided and prodded to by those with an agenda including and especially Trump. He should have gone against his very nature and just have been quiet and let the NFL handle it as they saw fit. If he was smart and we all know he is not, this would have all died down and not have been a problem, but that ship is sailed and there will be absolutely no good that will come with this other than the satisfaction that the NFL is on the decline and will completely fail and the owners will lose their teams and all NFL employees from custodians, cheerleaders and the players themselves will be out of work. Hope everyone is happy.


R_P

R_P Avatar



Posted: May 23, 2018 - 8:56pm


miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3261.3 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: May 23, 2018 - 3:57am

countering bad ideas with good ideas?

this is crazy talk!





Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: Biscayne Bay
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 23, 2018 - 3:16pm

 ziggytrix wrote:

I thought it was spot-on.

Could you elaborate on how active efforts to deny a platform to abhorrent messages is a problem? I'll start you with a hypothetical example.

Let's say I'm a really passionate believer that people who post on the internet using handles of the format Adjective + Numeral should be chemically and/or physically castrated (for whatever absurd reason). BillG sees me posting horrible (in his opinion) things directed not specifically at you, but very obviously generally about "those adjective-numeral people", and deletes it from his website. How is this a problem?

 
Now this bleeds into the civil rights argument. Remember that Rand Paul wasn't a proponent of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. I believe his thought was that the government shouldn't regulate what businesses must do - such as serve people of all races. Right or wrong ethically, it's that the government should not get involved in business practices in that way. Superficially I think he's got a point, that we shouldn't legislate what businesses choose to do/not do.

So, should BillG ban people with exclusive or insulting or divisive opinions? If you take Rand Paul's approach, the answer is: it's a business. BillG can do any damn thing he pleases. If it's not a valid business model, then it'll fail on its own.

Or should we legislate what BillG can do when he sets up a forum? Tell him what he can/can't allow? Bring in the FCC?

—-

Finishing up the Rand Paul thing, a little deeper: if they allowed businesses to be racist, as they were then, then the unwanted minorities in an area would be unable to get some staples - like groceries or gas. "You have to go to the colored store for your food" "But, there is no colored grocery store?!" or the colored gas station, etc. I can see where the Civil rights Act was very important in making sure that we didn't exclude races/religions/genders/etc from the marketplace for their own survival - even though it's "modified" capitalism. Rand Paul avoids that inhumane consequence of letting the marketplace make the decisions.



ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 23, 2018 - 2:47pm

 ziggytrix wrote:

I thought it was spot-on.

Could you elaborate on how active efforts to deny a platform to abhorrent messages is a problem? I'll start you with a hypothetical example.

Let's say I'm a really passionate believer that people who post on the internet using handles of the format Adjective + Numeral should be chemically and/or physically castrated (for whatever absurd reason). BillG sees me posting horrible (in his opinion) things directed not specifically at you, but very obviously generally about "those adjective-numeral people", and deletes it from his website. How is this a problem?

 
Dial back the egregiousness of the speech a little and see if your premise still works.
Page: Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next