I’m feeling Chilly
All comments submitted after now will go into moderation until approximately 9am tomorrow.Two things to bear in mind:
1. We’re applying a very strict threshold for possibly defamatory statements against just about anyone or anything.
2. If a comment is reasonably civil and has something remotely to do with the topic at hand, or free speech in Canada in general, it’s fine. Comments designed mainly to provoke a reaction from another commenter aren’t. Nor are the comments provoked by such comments. chris selley macleans
Chris has been blogging at Tart Cider for coons ages. So long that the Lying Jackal actually said he had “crypto nazis” on his blogroll. When Chris feels it necessary to tell the commentors that they are going to be checked out for defamation or flaming you know he is operating in libel/HRC chill land.
Which is what all of this is about.
For a second in an earlier post I had to think whether I wanted to put “detonate” and Muslim in the same post…a second later I was fine with that. But that second, or the post unwritten, or unposted is precisely what these bastards are all about.
June 2nd, 2008 at 10:20 pm
Jay,
The post unwritten at all, yes, I too have a problem with. The second’s delay, though, I don’t. As an ethical matter, I don’t believe it’s right to deliberately or carelessly offend people. People who do that deserve to be criticised in return. Next time some middle-aged “progressive” male blogger is about to suggest that a female conservative needs sexual intercourse, the world would be a better place if he stopped to think “Do I really want to be called out as an idiot by the blogosphere?”
However, I don’t want to see this particular ethical norm translated into law, for main reasons:
(a) Can’t trust the govt to administer it sparingly and neutrally—too much incentive to use it as a quick and easy tool to shut down critics or placate some angry group
(b) whether the offence was deliberate/ careless, or a reluctant but necessary “tough talk” diagnosis, is in the eye of the beholder. Discussing the state that Islam worldwide is in today, for example, is not going to be pleasant, any more than a doctor telling a dying patient to stop smoking or over-eating is going to be welcomed by the patient. Too much incentive for the Elmos of the world to want to shoot the messenger – literally, in some parts of the world.
Indeed, I think this is one of the key differences between conservative and libertarian “offenders” vs left-wing ones. Writers like Steyn are making serious public policy points. Even Ann Coulter and La Shaheed-al are making serious public policy points, even if I personally think the medicine could be given a dose more sugar rather than castor oil. But your Jake and Dinos Chapman types aren’t interested in getting information across: causing offence is the point. Steyn, Coulter and KS would be overjoyed if Muslims’ response was “All right. Tell us what we’re doing wrong. We’re listening.” But your typical “transgressive” artist, faced with uncomfortable tolerance from the establishment, feels cheated – and tries a stronger dose next time.
June 2nd, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Err, the blank should read “two”.
June 3rd, 2008 at 8:06 am
Apparetnly publishing Cartoons of Mohammend is offensive, but blowing up an embassy and killing innocent people is not .
June 3rd, 2008 at 10:04 am
The post unwritten at all, yes, I too have a problem with. The second’s delay, though, I don’t.
While I agree with your comments, Rod, I disagree with the observation that you don’t have a problem with “the second’s delay.” I have a problem with any delay or hesitation in voicing an opinion if the cause is a concern about possible government reaction. I have no problem if Jay (or Chris Selley, etc) want to spike a post becuase they hear a little voice saying hey, you’re being an asshole (or even ‘you could make that point more clearly’) – we are all better off for considered civil discussion. When the little voice is saying oooh, the CHRC won’t like that – we have gone beyond what is tolerable in a free society.
...the world would be a better place if he stopped to think “Do I really want to be called out as an idiot by the blogosphere?”
Undoubtedly – although the escalation (and restriction) of rhetoric on both sides doesn’t help.
June 3rd, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Yep, what DCardno said. If the delay is to think “Is this right? Is this civil?”, good. If it’s “Will this irritate some poerful person or group even though I think it’s right,” bad. Amendment accepted.