Hi Steve, When you use the word censorship to describe Podtech being responsible and cutting Loren loose, that is misleading.
Loren Feldman has the right to say what he wants to say. Podtech has the responsibility for its programming. I have a responsibility and freedom to express what I do. No one has suggested that he doesn't shoot or say that he wants to. However, I do suggest that Podtech is condoning this poison, putting their brand on it, and yes, I want to see it gone from their site. I say this because in my view Podtech means something, has a code, and a responsibility. Of course, that is my view, and only through friendship with the company. Now, however, I am disappointed in their behavior, and it disheartens me. It's been great to read your comments. --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Watkins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Thanks for letting us know. > > Im saddened that it sounds like you are going to leave this group, to > be honest I dont understand why. The group has people with different > opinions on most things, and it is not exactly the podtech supporters > group, so I dont really understand why leaving is part of the solution > for you? > > As for John Furrier and what Podtech do, I have a pre-existing unlove > for podtech which probably affects my opinion. I have incredibly mixed > feelings on the whole issue of what is an appropriate response. When > this happens in big media, the safe option is usually to ditch the > offender. There will always be some people who have been real > offended, and demand action. Some will be largely indifferent. And > others will think that any action is an over-reaction. At a bare > minimum Id say podtech have to do a better job of explaining and > justifying Loren's video than he has thus far managed himself, and > whatever happens we've all made our own personal judgements about this > sort of video. They dont have to censor him for damage to have been > done, and those whose instincts may be to support freedom of > expression, are not helped by the confusing justification for the video. > > This can then spiral into people who have been offended, feeling like > others are siding with the offender instead of the victim, not giving > enough support, tacitly supporting ignorant attitudes etc. > > Now the waters are also being muddied via Lorens explanation for his > videos. I have yet to form an opinion on his intent, he's suggesting > that he's demonstrated a lot of important thinngs but Im not > convinced, and I cant get away from the fact that real people have > been genuinely hurt by this stuff, in what seems like either an > exercise to demonstrate things humanity already knows, or a lousy > publicity stunt. > > Cheers > > Steve Elbows > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "marforton" <marforton@> wrote: > > > > > > I just spoke with John Furrier at Podtech. The only possible thing to > > conclude from my call with John is that he is in full support of Loren's > > offensive comments. He not only declined to comment on his own position > > but said that other media had been deemed offensive because of the > > "length of the videos". Huh? > > > > Podtech has apparently already played their cards to support Loren as > > evidenced by the latest on the 1938 media site: "Special Thanks to > > Podtech for supporting artists rights, and freedom from censorship." > > > > Nice. Clearly the real work starts now. One less black tech blogger in > > this group. Out. > > > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Streeter" <bill@> wrote: > > > > > > Yes that's my point. I really don't understand all the attention > > > that he got from this group to begin with. He's a link bater and a > > > troll. He says stupid shit to get attention and that doesn't require > > > a lot of creativity or skill. > > > > > > I think we can all agree that certain words are offensive. No need > > > to give undue attention to those that use them just to get > > > attention. It's sorta like replying to a spam email, and we all know > > > not to do that. (I hope!) > > > > > > The only way to hurt a troll is to ignore it. > > > > > > Bill Streeter > > > LO-FI SAINT LOUIS > > > www.lofistl.com > > > www.billstreeter.net > > > > > > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Steve Watkins" steve@ > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Well that attitude would certainly save a lot of time, and would > > > also > > > > counteract the fact that this hole thing does seem to be a > > > deliberate > > > > publicity stunt, possibly. > > > > > > > > But as we've been talking about this on the group for days, I > > > thought > > > > Id draw attention to the fact he's finally got round to offering > > > more > > > > context, and attacked this group to boot. > > > > > > > > Bu yeah personally if Id been the only person who saw his technigga > > > > video, I doubt Id have mentioned it here, try to resist attention > > > > seeking behaviour of all kinds, not always easy. > > > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > > > Steve Elbows > > > > > > > > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Streeter" <bill@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Loren who? What are you talking about? Is Loren a group troll or > > > > > something? What did I miss? Why should we care what this "Loren" > > > > > that you speak of thinks, says or does? Is he in charge of > > > > > something? What makes him relevant? > > > > > > > > > > Seriously, are we really gonna talk about every fool with an > > > opinion > > > > > that says something stupid in a video? Why should we care? > > > Youtube > > > > > is full of nutcases with webcams saying stupid shit. Are we > > > gonna > > > > > talk about all of them too? > > > > > > > > > > Don't feed the trolls. > > > > > > > > > > Bill Streeter > > > > > LO-FI SAINT LOUIS > > > > > www.lofistl.com > > > > > www.billstreeter.net > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
