Stuff bow to terrorists’ will when it suits them

After every Islamic terror attack, the legacy media have without fail wagged the finger at anyone who tries to discuss the nexus between Islam and violence, warning sternly that ?that?s what the terrorists want!? The murderous creep who perpetrated the horrific crimes in Christchurch also made quite clear what he wanted. This time, the media are happy to comply. Quote:

Terrorist attacks are always intended to spread fear through the media, but this was something more than that. This attacker knew his motives and modus operandi would spread all over the world in minutes, both on mainstream news websites and through social media. He was right, and it did.

The giant technology companies which are now such an essential part of our lives must reckon with how they allowed it. Media should too. End of quote.

Stuff go even further: essentially arguing to shut down ordinary citizens? open access to the internet. Quote:

If it doesn’t have the technology to confidently stop this kind of content being uploaded with the tools it has to hand, simply stopping all uploads for a brief period of time would have been worth considering. It would be worth the disruption to normal service and would be the exact opposite of letting terrorism “win”. End of quote.

Or, in this case, it would be doing exactly what he wanted. And how quickly would ?a brief period of time? become permanent? When citizens hand over power to governments, they rarely give it back. The Patriot Act in the US was supposed to expire in 2005. It?s still there.

How convenient will it be, too, that the only people who will be able to speak freely on the internet are the media. Plato envisioned a fascist state run by elite ?Guardians?. Legacy media like Stuff fondly imagine themselves filling that role.

In their attempt to demonise citizen media, the hacks at Stuff spin ever-more bizarre analogies. Quote:

Yet we cannot ignore the ways that the internet encourages extreme racist views [?] It is because the recommendation engine, as many have written about and demonstrated, naturally seems to lead people from casual interests to “harder” content.

As Zeynep Tufekci noted in the New York Times, you start with jogging videos and are soon recommended content about ultra-marathons. End of quote.

Why, yes: just last week I was looking up a new cheesecake recipe, and before I knew it, I was advocating mass genocide. Quote:

There are talkback hosts who ask listeners whether Islam has a place in swimming pools and have invited foreign guests on who call Palestinians “filthy rodents”.

Online there is a small community of anonymous Twitter accounts obsessed with attacking the one refugee MP in our Parliament, and are interacted with by some politicians. End of quote.


Stuff want to stop you hearing from not just Katie Hopkins, but Milo or Tommy Robinson. They don?t want you to complain when swimming pools are gender-segregated to placate a patriarchal religion. They want to stop you criticising Golly G and talking to your representatives. Agree with them or not, those are all valid topics for discussion. But Stuff want everyone to shut up and do as they?re told.

Not only is this advocating for censorship and state-media clampdowns anti-democratic and draconian, it?s exactly what the vile terrorist in Christchurch wanted. The killer made clear that he wanted the media and technology companies to crack down. His warped reasoning is that by doing so, they will make people angrier and embolden extremists even further. Philosopher Sam Harris noted years ago that the media-elite?s crackdown on any reasonable discussion on Islam had only served to abandon the public sphere to extremists. In the Christchurch terrorist?s twisted mind, this will inevitably facilitate a race war.

Stuff are giving the terrorist what he wanted.