No-platforming has gone from a powerful tool to prevent people who spew hate to be given public platforms to the silencing of anyone who was rude to you once in a queue in Tescos. About 30 years ago. And, more times than not, it’s the no-platforming of someone who was rude to your third cousin, five-times removed baby-sitter’s hamster breeders next door neighbours cousin who you’ve never actually heard of being no-platformed for crimes as yet unspecified. The no-platforming requires mass twitter harassment which, for those who continue to be incapable of understanding, is actually a CRIME.
Personally, I think Jonathan Ross is sexist bellend. I find his television program beyond embarrassing: he doesn’t want to be there, the guests don’t want to be there. I can’t begin to fathom how it constitutes entertainment. And, despite the bookcases devoted fantasy and science fiction in this house, I’ve never heard of the Hugo awards. I’m going to assume this is because they very rarely have female winners and there are very few books written by men in this house. I wouldn’t want to attend anything Ross presented at but, then, I feel that way about most award ceremonies: mostly white men congratulating other white men on being white men.
They are dire.
But, this no-platforming Ross because of a twitter campaign by a bunch of people who have never heard of him is dangerous territory. The comparisons with McCarthyism are apt. No-platforming is no longer about preventing hate speech but assumed crimes without evidence or basis in law. And, is deeply hypocritical when people who actually promote hate speech, like David Irving and Nick Griffin, aren’t banned from major platforms.
By all means, object to sharing platforms with people who you believe promote hate speech but, first, you should check you actually know what you’re talking about. Because, twitter is full of nincompoops who’ve got the political acumen of a hamster with late stage rabies who think they’re the shit. Mostly, they just are shit.
Twitter mobs must not be allowed to dictate policy when huge swathes are involved just for the sake of a ruck rather than politics.
And, honestly, when did it become acceptable to allow people who threaten violence to dictate what social justice is? I mean, come on.