Alex Jones

What is the advertising value of a ban?

Banned

In a recent case of private companies exercising their right to de-platform voices they disagreed with, the controversial Alex Jones and his Infowars content was banned from various social media sites.? They included?YouTube, Facebook, iTunes, Google Podcast, Spotify, iHeartRadio, MailChimp, Disqus, LinkedIn, Flickr, Pinterest and several others.

The curious thing is that these different organisations all chose to exercise their legal right not to host Alex and the Infowars content contemporaneously. Does this prove there is an ‘Info War’? Was it a coordinated takedown and thus some form of restrictive trade practice?? Zerohedge has the story. Quote. Read more »

Bye, Bye. Morgan told by CNN to Piers off

Piers Morgan has been given the arse card by CNN…something Travis predicted a few days ago.

Sure they’ve dressed it up as an amicable parting of the ways but the bottom line is Piers Morgan got the arse card from CNN.

CNN President Jeff Zucker has decided to bring an end to Piers Morgan’s low-rated primetime show, network sources told POLITICO on Sunday. “Piers Morgan Live” could end as early as next month, though Morgan may stay with the network in another role.

Morgan, a former British tabloid editor, replaced Larry King in the 9 p.m. hour three years ago, prior to Zucker’s tenure as president. His show earned consistently low ratings, registering as few as 50,000 viewers in the 25-to-54 year-old demographic earlier this week.

“CNN confirms that Piers Morgan Live is ending,” Allison Gollust, head of CNN communications, told POLITICO on Sunday after an earlier version of this post was published. “The date of the final program is still to be determined.”

Morgan?told The New York Times?on Sunday that the show had “run its course” and that he and Zucker “have been talking for some time about different ways of using me.? Sources who spoke to POLITICO said the decision to end the show was Zucker’s.

Zucker took the helm at CNN at the beginning of 2013 and has since brought incremental change to the network, including revitalized news programs and a new emphasis on films and documentary shows. Primetime remains the one area where Zucker has yet to impliment substantive change, a new 10 p.m. roundtable program with Anderson Cooper notwithstanding. ? Read more »

Piers Morgan vs. Alex Jones – a reader’s thoughts

A reader emails regarding the gun control debate and in?particular?the Piers Morgan vs. Alex Jones.

So yeah.. just got through reading the reporting about this and finally got time to watch the full broadcast:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tf-i3Y5iRYo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtyKofFih8Y

To be honest, after watching that, I think most pro-gun advocates need to let that one slide. I’m sure the pro-control crowd, given time to see more than just the highlights and soundbits, will want some distance.

You don’t have to print what I’m saying here, but you’re welcome to if you like -?if you want to blog it, that’s your call, cut and paste as you see fit.. grab what you need. If you’re re-printing, just include the statement from myself that I try to live, act and comment from a neutral position – I’ll hear out both sides then make my own judgement. I don’t comment from the left, right, or center, nor do I subscribe to their mailers – only what I personally believe, regardless of political fanboi-ism.

I’ve wavered on my (very ‘not matters much at all considering I don’t have a US citizenship’) opinion of the whole US firearms debacle. I don’t believe that civilians have a “need” for firearms like the “civilian” modified AR-15. I’m highly aware that 70-odd% of firearms violence is caused by hand-guns, not Assault Rifles. I’m well aware that considering it’s political and historical ramifications, the 2nd Amendment must be upheld.

But what exactly are the ramifications of that 2nd Amendment; what did those founding fathers mean; and what do those sacrosanct passages really entitle a gun owner to?

The full debate between Alex and Piers uncovers a lot – and it’s not the conspiracy about?serotonin?re uptake?inhibitors.. or any other crackpot idea that Jones can make some money off now that Ron Paul isn’t being fucked over for his financial benefit.

In case you missed it.. “INFOWARS DOT COM!!!”

Alex Jones is the Alexei/Lucia Maria of US Gun Politics. He’s the example of the absolute worst of the argument, that level that Colbert doesn’t even reach in his satire. The problem is that one side uses reason, the other froths at the mouth- and because the former engages the latter, the latter is enabled.

I’ve spent time among the Ron Paul crowd, arguably the most Republican of the GOP. I’ve spent time among the Obama people, who are the Clinton people, who are the Carter people. And to look at both of their arguments, I see the flaws in both.

The Democrats are reacting, which they should, but in the wrong areas: I personally think they’re on the right track with universal background checks, particularly in the area of mental health, and closing loopholes like the “Gun Show Loophole”. But they’re reacting too late, to political footballs that are simply a hot topic to earn a vote.

The Republicans are reacting, which is, I guess, all they can do.. defend the 2nd Amendment, and?manoeuvre?around that basic premise. The problem is that their current argument (see Wayne LaPierre’s comments and their notorious press release) falls apart when they compare themselves to other countries – ie: video game consumption per capita.

I think the issue, that nobody wants to address as a potential political landmine, is the question of “Why are Americans so much more prone to deciding to go out in a ‘Blaze of Glory’ by shooting up a school before they top themselves? Is our national culture a bit… ‘fucked’?”

Tom Arnold F*cks For Virginity

800px-TL-RugerKP90-4

There has been plenty of debate recently in the US and indeed worldwide surrounding gun control following the recent shootings in Connecticut. One thing we haven’t been short on is hypocrisy by A-listers and actors/actresses who stand against guns and violence, but have been more than willing to suck off the Hollywood tit even if they have to use guns.

Read more »

A good decision

Pommy bureaucrats work out that ?should be shot? is a figure of speech…which is altogether different again from wondering out loud what would happen if a mad man entered a news room and discharged firearms:

Top Gear presenter Jeremy Clarkson’s comment that striking public sector workers ”should be shot” did not breach broadcasting rules, TV watchdog Ofcom has ruled.

Clarkson was forced to apologise and the regulator launched an investigation after his remark, made on The One Show, sparked around 31,700 complaints and led to condemnation from union leaders and politicians, with Prime Minister David Cameron branding the TV star’s statement ”silly”.

On November 30, on the evening of Britain’s biggest public sector strikes for 30 years, Clarkson said that he would take the striking workers outside and ”execute them in front of their families”.

Ofcom said that the comments, while ”potentially offensive”, were justified by the context.

Hosts Matt Baker and Alex Jones introduced Clarkson on The One Show by alluding to his provocative and outspoken nature, the watchdog said.

It added that viewers of the BBC1 show would have expected Clarkson to make ”potentially controversial or offensive statements” because of his ”well-established public persona and that it would have been clear ”that his comments were not an expression of seriously held beliefs”.

×