Deleted tweet detection is currently running at reduced
capacity due to changes to the Twitter API. Some tweets that have been
deleted by the tweet author may not be labeled as deleted in the PolitiTweet
interface.
Showing page 103 of 1543.
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx @ScottGreenfield @Popehat It seems obvious to me that *theater owners should error strongly on the side of allowing free expression* is not inconsistent with *extreme cases might warrant exceptions--if Hitler is reanimated, fuck him* — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx @ScottGreenfield @Popehat As with opposing torture and killing babies, I oppose attempts to suppress artistic expression on principle, and also, like a human, can dream up extreme outlandish cases where other principles would add up to overruling the normal rule — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx @ScottGreenfield @Popehat Oh, you're against murdering babies? What if you went back in a time machine and baby Hitler were there? How revealing! You're not actually against killing babies! — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx @ScottGreenfield @Popehat I sort of disagree. This seems like the thing torture supporters would do when I said torture should be illegal. *Even if there were a ticking time bomb that would destroy the world and a guy at Gitmo who knew how to stop it?* — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx @ScottGreenfield @Popehat The Dr. S estate could have renounced the copyright if their intent was to distance themselves from the work. Instead they acted in a way that prevents people who want to buy the art from getting it. Like the Taliban, they want to disappear that which they see as wrong — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx @ScottGreenfield @Popehat As well, I tend to object to acts *likely to chill future expression* — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx @ScottGreenfield @Popehat I tend to object to acts motivated by *a desire to suppress supposed wrong think* not acts motivated by (say) *need to expand infrastructure* — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx @ScottGreenfield @Popehat Sure. The destruction of a public monument might or might not be an attack on free expression, depending on various factors. — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx @ScottGreenfield @Popehat I think you probably understand the *worried about the power of the state* reasons I support freedom of expression but not the *facilitates truth seeking or beauty or civic deliberation* reasons I support freedom of expression. — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@CodyShedd Seriously. That guy should get a raise. — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx @ScottGreenfield @Popehat Some things, though not all things, are substantively attacks on free expression, which is distinct from the First Amendment in ways you don't seem to acknowledge. — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx @ScottGreenfield @Popehat But if you prefer a different example, would you object to a frat that went to a comedy club next to campus and booed every time a female comedian told a joke because they don't believe women can be funny? — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx @ScottGreenfield @Popehat Burning art you made with the intent to burn is rather different than burning art others made, who would object to your burning it, with the intent of preventing people from seeing it and thereby being corrupted. — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
Germany is right there! — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
Okay, who can explain how an Oslo bar winds up with this beer lineup? https://t.co/ENPMlrBqpE — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx @ScottGreenfield @Popehat People have a right to shun songs released by gay people, and a right to try to convince others to do so. When they exercise that right in that way, we should criticize them. And there are other exercises of that right that also warrant criticism. — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@ScottGreenfield @davidminpdx @Popehat If the Taliban bought a small Akron Ohio museum it would be within its lawful rights to burn all works inside that depicted naked women. Would @davidminpdx find it dangerous for me to criticize them for doing so as enemies of free artistic expression? — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@ScottGreenfield @davidminpdx @Popehat I don't get it. As I said at the time, the Dr. S estate is within its legal rights to stop publishing the Cat in the Hat if it wants. And I think it would be bad if they did. There is no contradiction there. — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@ScottGreenfield @Popehat @davidminpdx Especially since no party will have me :) — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx You are doing the very thing that you're accusing others of doing—treating criticism as illegitimate. Lamenting "cancel culture" is a criticism of the people who are engaging in it, an expressive activity you are treating as "dangerous." — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@barrydeutsch @evansmithhist @ENBrown very good on this — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@barrydeutsch @evansmithhist This is a good story idea, much appreciated. I've urged a nonvoting member of Congress for prisoners before, would be good to revisit from this angle. — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx People aren't foregrounding the comedy club owner's associational rights in that controversy because as far as I am aware literally no one was threatening to violate them and they were indeed not violated. — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx You write as if anyone was contesting the rights of the comedy club owner or urging their abrogation. Was anyone? Who? — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx I've already showed you that I explicitly acknowledged the free association rights at play in the Chappelle matter, contra your claims. And in the Chappelle matter, the theater workers suffered no negative consequences of which I'm aware. How is this an example of your claims? — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx If the owner of the copyright to Beloved just refused to publish it anymore because they found it offensive, would that not be a posthumous blow against Morrison's free expression and the interest of readers in the ability to read what they like? — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx Do you disagree that a movie projectionist who refused to project any films with Black actors would be undermining the ability of directors and Black actors to artistically express themselves? — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx I'd be curious to hear you expound on the supposed danger & cite an example of it. But no, I don't think it's dangerous to acknowledge the fact that one can lawfully exercise one's expressive rights in ways that (for example) undermine the ability of others to express themselves. — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx A projectionist in the 1970s was perfectly free to withdraw his labor from any film he found offensive. But if projectionists kept walking out any time a film featured a Black actor, I think the overall effect would be to undermine artistic freedom. — PolitiTweet.org
Conor Friedersdorf @conor64
@davidminpdx Perhaps I am wrong about how you'd react. Regardless we both agree that people enjoy the freedom to boycott whatever they like. My contention was that some boycotts can undermine artistic freedom. I'll give you an example: — PolitiTweet.org
