… to ask why Giles Coren hasn’t been cancelled yet?

[mowly77]

The vile Dawn Foster tweets ffs. But he seems Teflon coated. He will never be cancelled. Three fucking columns a week … a pissing radio show, albeit on Times Radio, which surely no one listens to. I would love to be proved wrong. Absolutely love to be.

@Blossomtoes

So it’s not right to point out he has form going back years? Perhaps it’s indicative that he should have been dealt with long before this.

But the examples on this thread are only a small snapshot. Lots of his columns are quite nondescript in terms of outrage. He’s been a journalist 30 years. There are a lot of them.

However as @Bryonyshcmyony points out people only look for the bad stuff that supports their desire for someone to be ‘cancelled’.

And it was a dig @fraddu.

But then your posts are pretty disingenuous

I never said it wasn't a criticism but it doesn't make my point less valid.
Where have I been disingenuous? I think my take on the situation is pretty clear.

Blossomtoes it is possible to hold the view that cancel culture is disgusting and that ad homiem attacks are appalling.

One does not right the other. One does not fix the issue. Indeed its part of the problem, which perpetuates and ingrains the problem by reinforcing it by making it acceptable to sling mud back at the person you dislike the views of.

This is the problem.

People sink to the lowest common denominator on this and seek to attack individuals rather than the subject as a whole.

Why is the debate about sacking an individual and not a debate about why newspapers like controversial columnists?

Who drives clicks and revenue?

What does outrage generate and are you engaging in this madness because you've been manipulated into this outrage by the hunt for revenue.

Your outrage at individuals, actually feeds the monster. It will drive attention from those who agree as well as those who click to be outraged.

The debate shouldnt be about individual comments and slurs or cancelling individuals. It should be about how media doesn't valye or invest in quality journalism that people want to read.

Everyone is too busy obsessing over celebrity opinions rather than actual issues and problems in society.

They are 'oh look, a squirrel!' stories so people don't see the important stuff.

You are complicit in the problem if you then call for heads on sticks.

Why is the debate about sacking an individual and not a debate about why newspapers like controversial columnists?

It’s both. Not that the latter is the issue here. The two columnists under discussion on this thread have their positions through nepotism. Indeed that nepotism lies at the root of Coran’s appalling tweets. He hates having it pointed out that if he didn’t have the connections he does he wouldn’t be employed by the Times or broadcast media.

@Bryonyshcmyony

The tweet this week was shitty and wrong and stupid. It’s sufficient to be outraged by that rather than the other stupid things he’s said

Yes I agree but the nature of cancel culture is that you spend time googling every tiny detail of their life and read all their columns then use them to attack anyone who doesn't immediately agree, like a PP using the "child rape" quote to smear me.

How can it have been a smear when you said on this thread you found his child rape gag amusing? Having your own posts quoted isn't a smear fyi.

But that wasn't what you did @Classica

At least own it!

@Bryonyshcmyony

But that wasn't what you did *@Classica*

At least own it!

You said you found the child rape gag amusing, I quoted this back to you and then you started yelping about bullying.

Why don't you own the fact you're cool with child abuse jokes rather than acting as though you're being smeared. You smeared yourself.

You smeared yourself.

😆😆

No, you didn't. I said the comment about the drum kit was quite funny. You leapt on the "child rape" aspect and told me to go away and watch more "child rape comedy"

Noone in their right mind would think that GC was genuinely advocating child rape, its totally your issue.

It is perfectly possible to think what he wrote was distasteful and probably influenced by alcohol and not agree with people ganging up on him and picking holes in not only his family but anyone who isn't immediately signalling their hatred.

Yes it is and I'm glad I haven't done that. I also get @LittleBearPad's comment about not reading those columnists that you don't like. After this weekend I won't buy the Times any more. Not to "cancel" Giles Coren (I voted YABU on this thread because I don't agree with cancel culture) but because I don't want to support ugly trolling. Or paedophile apologists. Or posh Katie Hopkins Camilla Long. Or Quentin Letts.

There is a level of unpleasantness that I will tolerate. The Times has passed that level.

But that’s not thinking free speech is important. You don’t have to agree with him. You can think he’s an utter fucking idiot.

Believing in free speech is believing people have the right to say or write things you find abhorrent. That’s when anyone’s belief in free speech is tested. Not when everyone agrees with you.

For, hopefully, the last time Freedom of Expression does not mean freedom from consequences!!!!!

Everyone has the right to hold their own opinions and to express them freely. NO ONE has the right to be free from the consequences of doing so. Why is this so hard for people to understand?

Yes, you can make rape jokes, antisemitic comments and laugh at people's deaths if you want, but you can't expect there to be no consequences when you do so.

Does GC have the right to do what he did? Yes.
Does GC have the right to do what he did without consequence? No.

But what consequences do you think should arise from his personal Twitter?

The same as JKR making comments on her personal Twitter? Apparently she upset a lot of people. Do they have a right to demand she's dropped by her publisher?

@Bryonyshcmyony

No, you didn't. I said the comment about the drum kit was quite funny. You leapt on the "child rape" aspect and told me to go away and watch more "child rape comedy"

Noone in their right mind would think that GC was genuinely advocating child rape, its totally your issue.

Oh yes that inconsequential 'child rape' bit of his gag. Imagine honing in on that.

You keep revealing yourself.

Dog with a bone aren't you @classica? 😂

When it's regarding child abuse, real or hypothetical. Yes.

@Bryonyshcmyony

But what consequences do you think should arise from his personal Twitter?

The same as JKR making comments on her personal Twitter? Apparently she upset a lot of people. Do they have a right to demand she's dropped by her publisher?

If Rowling has upset sufficient people to make them stop reading her books, her publisher will drop her because she’s not making her any money. Equally if sufficient people stop buying the Times because of Coren and Knight it would be a sensible business decision to get rid of them.

That’s the financial argument which is also linked to the reputational damage of continuing to employ them.

Very well put RedToothbrush.

Totally agree @RedToothbrush.

Yes very good post redtoothbrush

The debate shouldnt be about individual comments and slurs or cancelling individuals. It should be about how media doesn't valye or invest in quality journalism that people want to read.
I agree with this.

You are complicit in the problem if you then call for heads on sticks.
I feel complicit that my money is supporting a system that rewards Shock Jocks that are so toxic and instrumental in setting the tone of discussion, whilst simultaneously silencing criticism of them because of who they are.

But what consequences do you think should arise from his personal Twitter?

The same as JKR making comments on her personal Twitter? Apparently she upset a lot of people. Do they have a right to demand she's dropped by her publisher?

I already answered this question about 15 pages ago, but to clarify....

The Times, who GC represents even on his private (public) Twitter page, abide by News UK policies and are signed up to the IPSO code of practice. Said policies and code have standards specifically relating to privacy, harassment and intrusion into grief, which GC has broken with the Dawn Foster tweet. At the very least he should be making a public apology but if The Times truly belive in the values they claim to do he should be removed from the post.

If someone posted on mumsnet that their boss or colleague was making sexist/misogynistic comments and jokes online I can guarantee everyone would be saying to report him to HR and no one would be on here defending his right to free speech.

Or even better refuse to give your money to a corporation that tacitly endorses his views

It's the hunting in packs to bring someone down that some object to here. No one is saying that you should continue with your subscription if you don't want to.

@mustlovegin

Or even better refuse to give your money to a corporation that tacitly endorses his views

It's the hunting in packs to bring someone down that some object to here. No one is saying that you should continue with your subscription if you don't want to.

It’s not “hunting in packs”. Individuals are unable to effect change that can be accomplished by working collectively. It’s the basis of all change in our society.

It’s not “hunting in packs”. Individuals are unable to effect change that can be accomplished by working collectively. It’s the basis of all change in our society

That sounds like a quote from the call out culture playbook!