12

Here is a small bit of context. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-19/new-zealand-facebook-christchurch-shooting-video-sheryl-sandberg/10915184

You can see halfway down the article where the site Kiwi farms basically told them to go fuck themselves and their response is to request more censorship at the upcoming G20 summit.

Should they stfu and go back to fucking sheep or should we think about the children?

Here is a small bit of context. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-19/new-zealand-facebook-christchurch-shooting-video-sheryl-sandberg/10915184 You can see halfway down the article where the site Kiwi farms basically told them to go fuck themselves and their response is to request more censorship at the upcoming G20 summit. Should they stfu and go back to fucking sheep or should we think about the children?

15 comments

[–] revmoo 2 points (+2|-0)

BTW here is Telstra's "explanation": https://exchange.telstra.com.au/blocking-websites-hosting-footage-christchurch/

We appreciate that it is necessary to ensure free speech is carefully balanced against protecting the community – but with these sites continuing to host disturbing content we feel it is the right thing to do to block them.

This reads like a literal child wrote it.

[–] CDanger 1 points (+1|-0)

free speech is carefully balanced against protecting the community

They are not protecting the community. Weakest argument for censorship ever when they can't even point out how what their doing helps anything.

these sites continuing to host

We'll block EVERYTHING on those sites because of one video. It doesn't matter what else of value is on there.

disturbing content

It's a free society; let people decide for themselves what is too much. There is far more graphic and disturbing content shown every day on TV and in movie theatres.