0
dreamdancer

Why Is iTunes Selling White Supremacy?

Recommended Posts

Quote

you think the homophobic lyrics should go back up?



No. I don't think they should be forced up any more than they should be forced down.

I leave the choice to iTunes. If they want to put them up they should. If they don't they don't.


My wife is hotter than your wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

you think the homophobic lyrics should go back up?



No. I don't think they should be forced up any more than they should be forced down.

I leave the choice to iTunes. If they want to put them up they should. If they don't they don't.



what about rape or paedophilia lyrics?

(just wondering where your 'free speech' boundaries are)
stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

you think the homophobic lyrics should go back up?



No. I don't think they should be forced up any more than they should be forced down.

I leave the choice to iTunes. If they want to put them up they should. If they don't they don't.



what about rape or paedophilia lyrics?

(just wondering where your 'free speech' boundaries are)



that's 2 separate questions....

the first is what about the limits of what JC thinks iTune should choose to put up if it were up to him?

the second is a 'free speech' boundary question - that implies something COMPLETELY different - and that's the question of where should the government step in and draw a line if it were up to JC.

The 2nd is an interesting question and I believe it dovetails into how responsible is any private industry in the offerings of items that are perceived as 'over the edge' and can they offer those items in a way that's not equivalent to shouting FIRE in a public theator (to use a tired and worn out phrase associated with the topic). Even so, if a company is irresponsible in their offerings, the private sector should have the first responsibility to effect change to their policies (via market forces or direct campaigns) LONG before we should ever consider any type of government intervention.

the problem with the gov intervention, is they just cannot differentiate between acting on a real and confirmed threat to public safety vs placating the public by acting on a perceived-only threat to public safety. Government is not driven by reality, it's driven by feelings and perceptions. That's why it's so incredibly inefficient, no business should be run on PR effect for the decision makers only.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


what about rape or paedophilia lyrics?

(just wondering where your 'free speech' boundaries are)



My opinion - They should not be censored here in the US. Rape lyrics and pedophilia (as it is spelled here) lyrics should not be banned.

Yelling "fire" in a crowded theater should not be banned. Nothing that chills the free expression of thoughts and ideas should be implemented.

One should be allowed to say whatever one wants. And one should be fully allowed to face the negative public consequences of that speech.

Thus a person may express his views about wanting to kill every Jew he sees. And I can then know that I really don't like this person.

Let people speak their minds. Even wackos have the right to let people know they are nuts.

Would you prefer that there are black markets for thought?


My wife is hotter than your wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

the problem with the gov intervention, is they just cannot differentiate between acting on a real and confirmed threat to public safety vs placating the public by acting on a perceived-only threat to public safety. Government is not driven by reality, it's driven by feelings and perceptions. That's why it's so incredibly inefficient, no business should be run on PR effect for the decision makers only.



Oh, that is good. (Seriously). Speaks very clearly to so many issues: why our governement is so fucking ineffective at some of the things they do, legislating morality, looking good versus doing the right thing, image versus substance, etc.

Even Mr Obama, who I did not vote for but still had invested hope for as far as maybe being somebody who could effect real change, has been totally caught up in the game. He has a very different agenda, but is guilty of all the same tactics.

Bush jammed a BS war down our throat. Obama wants to bankrupt the nation providing goodies to the 5% of the population that wants but can't afford things (probably about half of which wouldn't lift a finger on their own).

Both of them really piss me off.
" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Obama wants to bankrupt the nation providing goodies to the 5% of the population that wants but can't afford things.



like healthcare and food and a decent future for their children?
stay away from moving propellers - they bite
blue skies from thai sky adventures
good solid response-provoking keyboarding

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0