Milo Yiannopoulos.

Author
Discussion

968

11,945 posts

247 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
Monty Python said:
What I don't understand it why the media pays so much attention to what he says - there are much more important things going on in the world yet they seem to pay an inordinate amount of attention to him. You'd think that if he's a "troll" then the best thing they could do would be to ignore him, yet they do exactly the opposite.

It was the same when his book deal was announced - arms flew up in opposition yet all this did was provide free publicity and draw even more attention.

But there again, since most of the "mainstream" media in the US is in the pocket of the Democratic party so it's hardly surprising they went after him.
I think the contrary is true. Look at Katie Hopkins. She is a troll, even looks like a troll but gets huge publicity because the mainstream media is owned by right wing establishment figures that run News International and The Mail. She courts controversy as that is her currency and people like to feel angered and as if they're exposed to great injustice when actually their lives are pretty good by most standards. He is the same. He simply courts controversy and now has become a victim to his own medias sense of righteous outrage by appearing to condone underage sex.

Halb

53,012 posts

182 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
Monty Python said:
What I don't understand it why the media pays so much attention to what he says - there are much more important things going on in the world yet they seem to pay an inordinate amount of attention to him. You'd think that if he's a "troll" then the best thing they could do would be to ignore him, yet they do exactly the opposite.

It was the same when his book deal was announced - arms flew up in opposition yet all this did was provide free publicity and draw even more attention.

But there again, since most of the "mainstream" media in the US is in the pocket of the Democratic party so it's hardly surprising they went after him.
People love trolls, the circus that is the 24 hour media juggernaut love trolls. Look at the Trump thread. half of it is a circle jerk over minutiae of language.

Dindoit

1,645 posts

93 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
otolith said:
The issue isn't the offensiveness of his opinions on this issue, it is that those opinions can be used to deny him a platform for the other opinions he has been espousing. It's not that his critics want him to shut up about underage sex, it's that they want him to shut up full stop.
His critics have wanted him to shut up full stop, true. Nothing this week has changed that.

However you can't call Simon & Schuster (book publishers) his critics. You can't call CPAC (Conservative Political Action Conference) his critics. You can't call the Breitbart employees who threatened to quit his critics.

They were all happy to cosy up to his act when he was just a racist, Islamophobic misogynist. It comes as no surprise to find he's popular on here for that persona. The issue is precisely the offensiveness of his opinions on this issue. He messed up big time and now he's lost his platform to espouse (I think you mean spout?) his other opinions.

otolith

55,899 posts

203 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
The comments were made some time back and have been available on YouTube ever since. It's only since his critics stirred up a media ststorm that his position has become untenable. It's not uncommon for politicians (for example) to be fired or forced to resign for something that their superiors knew about and were willing to tolerate until the media whipped up fury about it. I don't think his publishers or Breitbart are taking a moral stance, I think they simply don't wish to be associated with someone with such scandalous views. As for CPAC, I'm amazed that they managed to overlook their homophobia in the first place, so I'm not surprised that these comments put him beyond the pale.

ofcorsa

3,527 posts

242 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
Milo nails it in the press conference, the rage is not about protecting children from pedophiles. It's faux outrage to try and deny him a platform.

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
ofcorsa said:
Milo nails it in the press conference, the rage is not about protecting children from pedophiles. It's faux outrage to try and deny him a platform.
Dindoit explains it better two posts above.

Blue Cat

976 posts

185 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
ofcorsa said:
Milo nails it in the press conference, the rage is not about protecting children from pedophiles. It's faux outrage to try and deny him a platform.
But why does he deserve 'a platform'?

As far as I can see he has said a lot of things people really like and a lot of things people really don't like

And he looks pretty

But what else has he actually achieved, why are his words so important to be heard.
He appears to be anther person who is just famous for being famous

I greatly dislike Katy Hopkins, but she at least did The Apprentice before her media career

Hayek

8,969 posts

207 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
Blue Cat said:
ofcorsa said:
Milo nails it in the press conference, the rage is not about protecting children from pedophiles. It's faux outrage to try and deny him a platform.
But why does he deserve 'a platform'?
It's not about deserving, the only criteria that applies is how many people want to listen to him on a platform surely? There are plenty.

If he was on a 'platform' with zero people listening then he may as well not be on a platform.

ofcorsa

3,527 posts

242 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
His words in themselves don't have to have value. But he has the right to say them.

Halb

53,012 posts

182 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
He still has His YouTube channel

fido

16,752 posts

254 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
968 said:
Look at Katie Hopkins. She is a troll, even looks like a troll but gets huge publicity because the mainstream media is owned by right wing establishment figures that run News International and The Mail.
She is no more a troll than James O'Brien on LBC - I find them to be opposite sides of the same coin - far too one way or another - though sometimes I will agree with something either said.
But to say the media is pandering only to the right-wing is demonstrably untrue - as per my LBC example.

Blue Cat

976 posts

185 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
ofcorsa said:
His words in themselves don't have to have value. But he has the right to say them.
Nobody is saying that he doesn't have the right to say them, just that they won't promote them anymore. He can say whatever wants, but words do have value and consequences and he needs to accept, if he wants to be in the public eye, that his words will be judged more harshly.



Halb

53,012 posts

182 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
Blue Cat said:
Nobody is saying that he doesn't have the right to say them, just that they won't promote them anymore. He can say whatever wants, but words do have value and consequences and he needs to accept, if he wants to be in the public eye, that his words will be judged more harshly.
Quite, he is still free to spit his mean spirited diatribes at will. He played the game and lost this round.

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
Halb said:
He still has His YouTube channel
Exactly. He's now more famous than ever, which presumably is the whole point in saying stuff just to upset people and generally just being a bit of a st.

I guess he'll get banned from YouTube next and end up one of these people self publishing on fringe websites and getting quoted loads in the NPandE or he might become our next prime minister. Who knows what the future holds,

jjlynn27

7,935 posts

108 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
It's so entertaining to see faithful rising in defense of their chosen deity. Trump, Farage, Milo, Blair; whatever garbage they spout, some two-bit numpty will try to justify their respective idiocies.

As for Milo; desperate attention we.

anonymous-user

53 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
jjlynn27 said:
It's so entertaining to see faithful rising in defense of their chosen deity. Trump, Farage, Milo, Blair; whatever garbage they spout, some two-bit numpty will try to justify their respective idiocies.

As for Milo; desperate attention we.
It's hilarious how he describes himself, he sees himself as a movement, he's very self important.

It's an odd phenomenon, involving the media and the internet that anyone actually gives a toss what these vainglorious big mouths say. They become monsters, fuelled by likes and followers on social media but not actually engaging in anything constructive whatsoever.


Dindoit

1,645 posts

93 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
fido said:
She is no more a troll than James O'Brien on LBC - I find them to be opposite sides of the same coin - far too one way or another - though sometimes I will agree with something either said.
But to say the media is pandering only to the right-wing is demonstrably untrue - as per my LBC example.
I always feel slightly grubby when I agree with something JO'B or KH says. That said I don't see O'Brien as a troll in the same way as Hopkins. She takes a deliberately controversial position on a subject, often creating the subject herself. He reacts to her (or Farage's etc.) position and takes the opposite view. You get the feeling sometimes neither truly believes what they're saying but they feel compelled to say it to keep their stock high.

As you say they're opposite sides of the same coin, a coin that tbh should be thrown down a well.

bodhi

10,333 posts

228 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
What disturbs me most about this is not Milo's comments, which appeared to be a very awkward joke at his own expense and his own experiences, but more the fact that the incriminating video was quite heavily edited before it was released for maximum effect and to make Milo look as bad as possible.

Not entirely sure why we can't have the full video and make our own minds up. Reeks of an organised takedown imo, which no matter who it is against, doesn;t sit well with me at all. Surely if he's that objectionable (and no doubt he can be), let him hang himself, rather than dodigly editing a video?

Hayek

8,969 posts

207 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
bodhi said:
What disturbs me most about this is not Milo's comments, which appeared to be a very awkward joke at his own expense and his own experiences, but more the fact that the incriminating video was quite heavily edited before it was released for maximum effect and to make Milo look as bad as possible.

Not entirely sure why we can't have the full video and make our own minds up. Reeks of an organised takedown imo, which no matter who it is against, doesn;t sit well with me at all. Surely if he's that objectionable (and no doubt he can be), let him hang himself, rather than dodigly editing a video?
Of course it does, it is AFAICT.

MTech535

613 posts

110 months

Wednesday 22nd February 2017
quotequote all
bodhi said:
What disturbs me most about this is not Milo's comments, which appeared to be a very awkward joke at his own expense and his own experiences, but more the fact that the incriminating video was quite heavily edited before it was released for maximum effect and to make Milo look as bad as possible.

Not entirely sure why we can't have the full video and make our own minds up. Reeks of an organised takedown imo, which no matter who it is against, doesn;t sit well with me at all. Surely if he's that objectionable (and no doubt he can be), let him hang himself, rather than dodigly editing a video?
It is on Youtube.

Joe Rogan Experience from around Sept/Oct 2015