• intensely_human
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    8 months ago

    There’s this idea going around that directly quoting the thing a person got cancelled for is spreading whatever hate they were spreading.

    The obvious side effect of such a practice is that people who get silenced never get their side of the story told.

    I find that sketchy as well

    • VikingHippie@lemmy.wtf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Actually, it turned out that the article DOES directly quote what she was cancelled for. It was just that the article made it sound like she’d declared her undying loyalty to Hamas when in actual fact she hadn’t even mentioned them. I’m just gonna copy a comment of mine from earlier today explaining the whole thing:

      Can someone please tell the freedom fighters in Palestine to flip their phones and film horizontal," she wrote on the platform on Saturday.

      That’s all. If you’re very inattentive or deliberately misinterpreting her words, you’d think that she was endorsing Hamas as “freedom fighters”.

      But if you DO pay attention and know anything, you’ll notice that she never mentions Hamas and know that Hamas aren’t usually the ones filming any of their atrocities. Add her clarification from a few days later and it’s clear that she did NOT endorse Hamas and is the victim of character assassination because she had the temerity to speak up against the apartheid regime:

      I just want to make it clear that this statement in no way shape or form is [inciting] spread of violence," she said. "I specifically said freedom fighters because that’s what the Palestinian citizens are… fighting for freedom every day.