Friday, December 27, 2013

Quacker Back On A & E!

Duck Dynasty will be on this season.

Despite the huge outcry from the LGBT community against Duck Dynasty star Phil Robertson, A&E decided to reinstate the controversial star back on the program.

The racist right turned out in droves to petition A&E's decision to suspend the star after he made some comments about gays and the Black community.

Now that seems to have gotten the attention of the junk food media Now the demands were heard and the controversy will now settle down. Could you imagine this was a huge story?

What happen was the GQ Magazine interview in which the outspoken star said some choice words about gays being compared to terrorism. Then of course that flack went to the head of A&E and they decided to put the star on leave.

The Robertson family were threatening to leave if they didn't reinstate the patriarch of the show. 

Now the controversy brought in a known asshole who continues to hog the limelight. She is a former governor of Alaska who was calling for the head of Martin Bashir on Obama News after he compared her to a slave who was defecated by his master.

Nowadays we gotten so much into the lives of celebrities. Even a redneck millionaire isn't spared from the outlandish behavior. Think about the Kardashians, Miley Cyrus, Justin Bieber, Kanye West, and every other angle of reality television and pop culture. They actually get a pass for some of the ignorance that comes out of their mouths.

Why not Phil?

Yeah, he's a stupid ass bigot. So what?

He's stupid ass money maker. He continues to motivate sales of products with his likeness and it was foretold that merchandise from the show sold out fast.

A&E issued a statement:

As a global media content company, A&E Networks’ core values are centered around creativity, inclusion and mutual respect. We believe it is a privilege for our brands to be invited into people’s home and we operate with a strong sense of integrity and deep commitment to these principals.

That is why we reacted so quickly and strongly to a recent interview with Phil Robertson. While Phil’s comments made in the interview reflect his personal views based on his own beliefs, and his own personal journey, he and his family have publicly stated they regret the “coarse language” he used and the mis-interpretation of his core beliefs based only on the article. He also made it clear he would “never incite or encourage hate.” We at A&E Networks expressed our disappointment with his statements in the article, and reiterate that they are not views we hold.

But Duck Dynasty is not a show about one man's views. It resonates with a large audience because it is a show about family… a family that America has come to love. As you might have seen in many episodes, they come together to reflect and pray for unity, tolerance and forgiveness. These are three values that we at A&E Networks also feel strongly about.

So after discussions with the Robertson family, as well as consulting with numerous advocacy groups, A&E has decided to resume filming Duck Dynasty later this spring with the entire Robertson family.

We will also use this moment to launch a national public service campaign (PSA) promoting unity, tolerance and acceptance among all people, a message that supports our core values as a company, and the values found in Duck Dynasty. These PSAs will air across our entire portfolio.

Newsbusters Noel Shepard claims the LEFT is exploding over this!

I bet. After all, the RIGHT exploded when Bill Maher took aim at the Catholic church.

The RIGHT exploded when a little child on YouTube said a prayer for President Barack Obama.

The RIGHT exploded when the president shook hands with Raul Castro at the Nelson Mandela funeral.

Okay, so when will the next explosion to happen in the junk food media?

Do we have to blame the Muslims, the Blacks or just another White guy?

In closing, this is a warning shot to the cast. The issue will probably be discussed on the future episodes and the we can only hope that Phil Robertson will not drive another problem into the mainstream again!

Because the eyes are watching. It's just not those faithful viewers.

Hate On YouTube May Soon Be Gone In One Click!

YouTube: View & Share!

The freedom of speech allows an individual be who they are. If one is to be the nasty condescending bigot online, then you may have to find another place to blow your hate. Google, Inc. the parent company of YouTube and Blogger is going to try to clean up its image. The first thing Google wants to tackle, is the bandwidth trolls. They are going weed out the trolls and permanently ban the hate from its websites.

Yeah, you may have heard of internet trolls. These are the people who constantly write comments on YouTube, Facebook, Blogger, and Twitter nasty, racist, homophobic, Islamophobic, sexist, downright evil comments about an event, a person, or even their own family members.

These people would end up becoming internet cyberbullies and cyberstalkers. These individuals are dangerous. They don't even know how far they'll go before someone hurts them or the person they're targeting.

Lawmakers are trying to curb cyberbullying by passing harassment laws (in regards to online behavior).

I am for that in two ways. It may stop people from creating phony profiles of individuals. I was a victim of this nonsense three years ago. And due to the constant drumbeat of this nonsense, I've semi-retired from making videos on YouTube. There's no reason to keep going on with the likes of some random asshole online. So I decided to move away from the spotlight for now!

It may end the ongoing racial slurs that seem to plague social networks like YouTube.

Mix blatant bigotry with poor spelling. Add a dash of ALL CAPS. Top it off with a violent threat. And there you have it: A recipe for the worst of online comments, scourge of the Internet.

Blame anonymity, blame politicians, blame human nature. But a growing number of websites are reining in the Wild West of online commentary. Companies including Google and the Huffington Post are trying everything from deploying moderators to forcing people to use their real names in order to restore civil discourse. Some sites, such as Popular Science, are banning comments altogether.

The efforts put sites in a delicate position. User comments add a lively, fresh feel to videos, stories and music. And, of course, the longer visitors stay to read the posts, and the more they come back, the more a site can charge for advertising.

What websites don't want is the kind of off-putting nastiness that spewed forth under a recent CNN.com article about the Affordable Care Act.

"If it were up to me, you progressive libs destroying this country would be hanging from the gallows for treason. People are awakening though. If I were you, I'd be very afraid," wrote someone using the name "JBlaze."
YouTube's current logo.
YouTube, which is owned by Google, has long been home to some of the Internet's most juvenile and grammatically incorrect comments. The site caused a stir last month when it began requiring people to log into Google Plus to write a comment. Besides herding users to Google's unified network, the company says the move is designed to raise the level of discourse in the conversations that play out under YouTube videos.

One such video, a Cheerios commercial featuring an interracial family, met with such a barrage of racist responses on YouTube in May that General Mills shut down comments on it altogether.

"Starting this week, when you're watching a video on YouTube, you'll see comments sorted by people you care about first," wrote YouTube product manager Nundu Janakiram and principal engineer Yonatan Zunger in a blog post announcing the changes. "If you post videos on your channel, you also have more tools to moderate welcome and unwelcome conversations. This way, YouTube comments will become conversations that matter to you."

White extremists are often on websites that support the Black community.
Anonymity has always been a major appeal of online life. Two decades ago, The New Yorker magazine ran a cartoon with a dog sitting in front of a computer, one paw on the keyboard. The caption read: "On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog." At its best, anonymity allows people to speak freely without repercussions. It allows whistle blowers and protesters to espouse unpopular opinions. At its worst, it allows people to spout off without repercussions. It gives trolls and bullies license to pick arguments, threaten and abuse.

But anonymity has been eroding in recent years. On the Internet, many people may know not only your name, but also your latest musings, the songs you've listened to, your job history, who your friends are and even the brand of soap you prefer.

"It's not so much that our offline lives are going online, it's that our offline and online lives are more integrated," says Mark Lashley, a professor of communications at La Salle University in Philadelphia. Facebook, which requires people to use their real names, played a big part in the seismic shift.

"The way the Web was developed, it was unique in that the avatar and the handle were always these things people used to go by. It did develop into a Wild West situation," he says, adding that it's no surprise that Google and other companies are going this route. "As more people go online and we put more of our lives online, we should be held accountable for things we say."

Nearly three-quarters of teens and young adults think people are more likely to use discriminatory language online or in text messages than in face to face conversations, according to a recent poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and MTV. The poll didn't distinguish between anonymous comments and those with real identities attached.

The Huffington Post is also clamping down on vicious comments. In addition to employing 40 human moderators who sift through readers' posts for racism, homophobia, hate speech and the like, the AOL-owned news site is also chipping away at anonymous commenting. Previously, anyone could respond to an article posted on the site by creating an account, without tying it to an email address. This fall, HuffPo began requiring people to verify their identity by connecting their accounts to an email address, but that didn't appear to be enough and the site now also asks commenters to log in using a verified Facebook account.

"We are reaching a place where the Internet is growing up," says Jimmy Soni, managing editor of HuffPo. "These changes represent a maturing (online) environment."

Soni says the changes have already made a difference in the quality of the comments. The lack of total anonymity, while not a failsafe method, offers people a "gut check moment," he says. There have been "significantly fewer things that we would not be able to share with our mothers," in the HuffPo comments section since the change, Soni says.

Newspapers are also turning toward regulated comments. Of the largest 137 U.S. newspapers - those with daily circulation above 50,000 - nearly 49 percent ban anonymous commenting, according to Arthur Santana, assistant communications professor at the University of Houston. Nearly 42 percent allow anonymity, while 9 percent do not have comments at all.

Curbing anonymity doesn't always help. Plenty of people are fine attaching their names and Facebook profiles to poorly spelled outbursts that live on long after their fury has passed.

In some cases, sites have gone further. Popular Science, the 141-year-old science and technology magazine, stopped allowing comments of any kind on its news articles in September.

While highlighting responses to articles about climate change and abortion, Popular Science online editor Suzanne LaBarre announced the change and explained in a blog post that comments can be "bad for science."

Because "comments sections tend to be a grotesque reflection of the media culture surrounding them, the cynical work of undermining bedrock scientific doctrine is now being done beneath our own stories," wrote LaBarre.

The Huffington Post and Associated Press contributed to the story.

Now I want an understanding to why Google's YouTube taken extreme measures on the nasty comments.

Here's an example of what YouTube deals with on a frequent basis.


all niggers need to be put in zoos!

chop this nigger dick off!

Stupid nigger i bet he couldnt even write down the site name in browser without making mistake

@dondopa No, don't kill them. That's just inhumane and stooping to their level. Just ship them back to Africa where they belong.

@CarlosCoolidgeAlden then they will probably kill themselves

@CarlosCoolidgeAlden Kill the Spearchuckers

You disrespect people by calling them niggers which is actually very stupid and shows that you are nothing but a white trash, and then you try to make them feel bad about saying dick as if thats more stupid then saying nigger. You are a bit retarded, you know that.lol Im shoked.lmfao

Niglet fuxation at its best!

Finally, a nigger with good taste

Go back to Africa nigger. Your species does nothing but rob, rape, kill, and cause general mayhem. Sub-human IQ and DNA to boot.

hahahaha. He probably does like the site.

@FlankerVT Kill the Spearchuckers

@tobybeachsowner Kill the Spearchuckers

@DaFoxx28 Maybe you should try some basic, entry level English classes. It would help with the run on sentences and incessant babbling.

Get down nigger!

@walmartian555 Good. Once they're in Africa they can do all the raping, robbing, torturing and general TNB they want.

Wow nigger you sure showed big ol mean YT. At least my father didn't run out on me while I was still in the womb. I can't say the same for you or any of your fellow niggers.

This video could only have been contrived by someone belonging to a race of low avg intelligence.
Yeah, it's about time and probably going to be a growing movement.

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails