Cancel Culture

[whelk]

Not that I ever watched the program but Viewpoint final episode cancelled as one of stars may have behaved inappropriately. How would they have coped with Ollie Reed? 

 

[badgerx16]

Everybody is abandoning him, what happened to "innocent until proven otherwise".

[egg]

26 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Everybody is abandoning him, what happened to "innocent until proven otherwise".

There seems a clear case to answer here. Sensible decision. 

[Weston Super Saint]

13 hours ago, egg said:

There seems a clear case to answer here. Sensible decision. 

Phew, well, if it 'seems' there is a case then that's alright then!

It 'seems' that he has been accused of a number of acts that are illegal :

https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/apr/29/actor-noel-clarke-accused-of-groping-harassment-and-bullying-by-20-women

Quote

The Guardian has spoken to 20 women, all of whom knew Clarke in a professional capacity. They variously accuse him of sexual harassment, unwanted touching or groping, sexually inappropriate behaviour and comments on set, professional misconduct, taking and sharing sexually explicit pictures and videos without consent, and bullying between 2004 and 2019.

Why have these 20 women decided it would be better to speak to the Guardian rather than report these alleged crimes to the police where they could achieve actual justice?

[egg]

1 minute ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Phew, well, if it 'seems' there is a case then that's alright then!

It 'seems' that he has been accused of a number of acts that are illegal :

https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2021/apr/29/actor-noel-clarke-accused-of-groping-harassment-and-bullying-by-20-women

Why have these 20 women decided it would be better to speak to the Guardian rather than report these alleged crimes to the police where they could achieve actual justice?

I don't know mate, I can't speak for them. 

What's your point? That they're lying because they seemingly haven't gone to the police? 

If they did, what do you expect the police to do? You surely understand how criminal law works. I've defended many sexual offence cases...easiest thing in the world...one person's word against the other thus rarely leads to a conviction. 

Sometimes "actual justice" can only be reached away from the legal system where the law often does not deliver justice. 

[Turkish]

20 women across a 20 year career is only a tiny amount of women that he has come across, I would suggest perhaps this is more of a misunderstanding than any evidence that he’s is the sexual predator that is being alleged. The naked filming seems to be a perfect way for a young actress to role play potential future scenes, with any young person in a customer facing position role play is often part of training. I also wonder if there is an element of racism here, trying to keep the black folk down as he is a very successful actor producer, we can’t have POC gatecrashing the white dominated industry, so a few hard to prove allegations of sexual misconduct might be a way to keep the POCs in the industry suppressed. It wouldn’t be the first time it’s happened.

Edited 1 May, 2021 by Turkish

[Weston Super Saint]

@egg

Sharing sexually explicit photos and videos without consent seems pretty much like a slam dunk to me.  

Is trial by media justice?

At no point have I said they are lying, just disagreeing with their methods - I get what you say about one person's word against another and the burden of proof in the criminal courts, but I also understand that the opposite is true when it comes to the media and the mud that is flung first tends to stick without any actual evidence.

Edited 1 May, 2021 by Weston Super Saint

[egg]

1 minute ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Sharing sexually explicit photos and videos without consent seems pretty much like a slam dunk to me.  

Is trial by media justice?

At no point have I said they are lying, just disagreeing with their methods - I get what you say about one person's word against another and the burden of proof in the criminal courts, but I also understand that the opposite is true when it comes to the media and the mud that is flung first tends to stick without any actual evidence.

It's a tough one, but sometimes, yes. We have a binary guilty / not guilty criminal justice system where many guilty people "get off" but are  regarded as having been proved right / innocent and the accusers regarded as proved wrong / lying. There's no justice in that. 

I suspect that not one of these women have anything to corroborate their claims, thus all of them would probably struggle to persuade a jury that they must convict. 

Lots of smoke here. Also an apology and a vow to change - nobody does that if they've done nothing wrong. 

[Weston Super Saint]

He's admitted that on one occasion he spoke inappropriately. I assume that is the reason for the apology...

[Baird of the land]

Reading Karen Carney's attack on social media companies because she got critical messages because she said something controversial about Leeds. I'm curious If she doesn't want to be messaged on social media when she makes controversial statements, what these sort of people exect social media companies to do, ban free speech, ban free speech for just the plebs.

[Manuel]

10 minutes ago, Baird of the land said:

Reading Karen Carney's attack on social media companies because she got critical messages because she said something controversial about Leeds. I'm curious If she doesn't want to be messaged on social media when she makes controversial statements, what these sort of people exect social media companies to do, ban free speech, ban free speech for just the plebs.

She comments and people disagree.  If she agrees her comments were wrong, apologise and move on.  If she doesn't feel her comments were wrong, stand up for yourself, or just switch it off.  

You can't have twitter all your own way and you can't always expect people to be nice.  Comes with the territory.  

[Fan The Flames]

Has Carney had a go at Twitter, or has she just said how the event made her feel.

I don't think she said anything controversial, I also don't think Leeds response was bad. The plle on afterwards was and whilst in the main that is on the individuals who post, I guess she feels that Twitter could take responsibility regarding the most abusive posts and I tend to agree with that.

She said it affected her mental health so she did the right thing and deleted her account.

[Lord Duckhunter]

1 minute ago, Fan The Flames said:

 

She said it affected her mental health so she did the right thing and deleted her account.

She should man up. 

[Fan The Flames]

7 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

She should man up. 

It would be good if she could have fronted it out, but couldn't and that's ok.

[Baird of the land]

8 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

Has Carney had a go at Twitter, or has she just said how the event made her feel.

I don't think she said anything controversial, I also don't think Leeds response was bad. The plle on afterwards was and whilst in the main that is on the individuals who post, I guess she feels that Twitter could take responsibility regarding the most abusive posts and I tend to agree with that.

She said it affected her mental health so she did the right thing and deleted her account.

Seems clear to me she's having a go at them from her latest comments.

It was clearly controversial as loads of people disagreed with her stance. Twitter's whole purpose is to cause positive and negative pile ons onto discussions whether its JK rowling, carney or whatever other celeb. If the people commenting weren't doing anything illegal(unless there's police action i've missed) i don't see why pile on should be considered inherently bad in just this case. Deleting her account seems the correct response given she doesn't want people contacting her on social media platforms.

 

[Fan The Flames]

4 minutes ago, Baird of the land said:

Seems clear to me she's having a go at them from her latest comments.

It was clearly controversial as loads of people disagreed with her stance. Twitter's whole purpose is to cause positive and negative pile ons onto discussions whether its JK rowling, carney or whatever other celeb. If the people commenting weren't doing anything illegal(unless there's police action i've missed) i don't see why pile on should be considered inherently bad in just this case. Deleting her account seems the correct response given she doesn't want people contacting her on social media platforms.

Because something is disagreed with doesn't automatically make it controversial. She said that a covid break would help a high tempo team like Leeds, that's not really controversial. 

Pile ons are part of it but like everything people over step the mark and she thinks that Twitter should pull the really bad one.

Twitter probably can't afford to police it though, but with numbers declining they might have to.

Interestingly peoples views on pile ons is influenced by whether they agree with the particular subject matter or not.

[egg]

3 hours ago, Baird of the land said:

Reading Karen Carney's attack on social media companies because she got critical messages because she said something controversial about Leeds. I'm curious If she doesn't want to be messaged on social media when she makes controversial statements, what these sort of people exect social media companies to do, ban free speech, ban free speech for just the plebs.

The phrase "Don't get in the ring if you don't want to get punched" comes to mind. She spouts some shite and can't be surprised there's been a reaction. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

28 minutes ago, egg said:

The phrase "Don't get in the ring if you don't want to get punched" comes to mind. She spouts some shite and can't be surprised there's been a reaction. 

Exactly. 
 

If you want to be taken seriously as a pundit you can’t start crying when you’re criticised. Deep down she knows she’s out of her depth and only got the job because of her sex. She’s creating a load of noise to cover it up. 

[Baird of the land]

1 hour ago, Fan The Flames said:

Because something is disagreed with doesn't automatically make it controversial. She said that a covid break would help a high tempo team like Leeds, that's not really controversial. 

Pile ons are part of it but like everything people over step the mark and she thinks that Twitter should pull the really bad one.

Twitter probably can't afford to police it though, but with numbers declining they might have to.

Interestingly peoples views on pile ons is influenced by whether they agree with the particular subject matter or not.

Saying they got promoted cos of Covid was controversial.

how do you pull legal responses, there seems zero definition to what she wants them to do.

As far as i’m Aware twitter does police reported content. The problem is the argument seems to have shifted to pre policing all content which would be very difficult to implement.

yeah humans beings are often two faced, one mob is good another is bad etc

 

 

[whelk]

1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Exactly. 
 

If you want to be taken seriously as a pundit you can’t start crying when you’re criticised. Deep down she knows she’s out of her depth and only got the job because of her sex. She’s creating a load of noise to cover it up. 

Cairney isn’t actually that bad. Although howler about Vest tackle apart the Leeds comment was true - Bielsa teams burn out. People have blinkers on with pundits. Cairney seems to be the only female one on tv that is ok from what I have seen. Alex Scott seems lovely person and horrible she seems to get a lot of abuse but adds no insight. 

[Chapel End]

The sooner people accept that most social media is just an attention seeking platform.

With that in the hands of some utter morons, you end up with some utter shite.

People post before actually thinking. 

 

[Hamilton Saint]

9 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Exactly. 
 

If you want to be taken seriously as a pundit you can’t start crying when you’re criticised. Deep down she knows she’s out of her depth and only got the job because of her sex. She’s creating a load of noise to cover it up. 

It's not criticism she objects to, it is online abuse. One can imagine the vile kind of misogynistic messages that have been sent. Would you tell Black players that they shouldn't complain about racist abuse they have suffered--that they should just learn to put up with it?

And why do you think she is out of her depth? Because she's a woman? She had a long professional career in club and international football. Do all the other TV pundits who are former players get their jobs only because they used to play professionally? Or does their experience give them a special insight into the game? If so, doesn't that apply also to her?

[Hamilton Saint]

10 hours ago, egg said:

The phrase "Don't get in the ring if you don't want to get punched" comes to mind. She spouts some shite and can't be surprised there's been a reaction. 

There is no excuse for online abuse. The anonymity of social media provides some lowlifes, unfortunately, with the opportunity to engage in vile and disgusting communications. They seem to believe that they should be able to post whatever they want, and not have to face any accountability. 

[Hamilton Saint]

12 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

She should man up. 

Or you could let loose your anima.

 

[Manuel]

2 hours ago, Hamilton Saint said:

There is no excuse for online abuse. The anonymity of social media provides some lowlifes, unfortunately, with the opportunity to engage in vile and disgusting communications. They seem to believe that they should be able to post whatever they want, and not have to face any accountability. 

We are all anonymous on here but usually manage to behave ourselves.  I'm in favour of anonymity online.  It allows me to read what people think, without them having to filter their thoughts or worry about repercussions.  Civility is overrated.  I want to know what's in people's minds.

[egg]

5 hours ago, Hamilton Saint said:

There is no excuse for online abuse. The anonymity of social media provides some lowlifes, unfortunately, with the opportunity to engage in vile and disgusting communications. They seem to believe that they should be able to post whatever they want, and not have to face any accountability. 

Nobody has condoned abuse. Twitter is a forum for opinion, and if an opinion is given, a counter opinion is to be expected. If the opinion is strong, it's OK that the response is strong. Sure, it shouldn't become abusive, but anyone who puts an opinion on twitter that they know is likely to be controversial must accept that to receive controversial comments in return - if they're not willing to accept that, don't post. 

[egg]

2 hours ago, Manuel said:

We are all anonymous on here but usually manage to behave ourselves.  I'm in favour of anonymity online.  It allows me to read what people think, without them having to filter their thoughts or worry about repercussions.  Civility is overrated.  I want to know what's in people's minds.

Good little post. Agreed. 

[egg]

5 hours ago, Hamilton Saint said:

It's not criticism she objects to, it is online abuse. One can imagine the vile kind of misogynistic messages that have been sent. Would you tell Black players that they shouldn't complain about racist abuse they have suffered--that they should just learn to put up with it?

And why do you think she is out of her depth? Because she's a woman? She had a long professional career in club and international football. Do all the other TV pundits who are former players get their jobs only because they used to play professionally? Or does their experience give them a special insight into the game? If so, doesn't that apply also to her?

On that last point. There's playing the game, and there's playing the game to a standard. I wouldn't expect a player who's played league 2 footy to appear in mainstream TV as a pundit for 2 reasons. 1, I'd never have seen him play, and 2, he's never played at the level that he's expressing opinion about. That matters to me - if Ashley Cole starts criticising Bertrand's performance it has validity to me cos he's played that role at the highest level and I respect his opinion because of that. If Bob Smith who's played 300 games there for Chelmsford City starts to criticise I take less notice. However, if he talks about the physicality part of the game, he can at least relate to it and I'll listen. Substitute a female pundit for Bob Smith...she's never played the male game, has played at a level we can all see is much lower, and can't have a view on the physicality.

Then you have the crap that Cairney says and posts which confirm that she is struggling at this level. The Vestergaard decision, the Saka foul/dive. This is someone who couldn't have a discussion about Arsenal's situation in a game looking "ominous" as her vocabulary such that she didn't know the word. 

Cairney is miles out of her depth. 

[Wade Garrett]

7 hours ago, Hamilton Saint said:

It's not criticism she objects to, it is online abuse. One can imagine the vile kind of misogynistic messages that have been sent. Would you tell Black players that they shouldn't complain about racist abuse they have suffered--that they should just learn to put up with it?

And why do you think she is out of her depth? Because she's a woman? She had a long professional career in club and international football. Do all the other TV pundits who are former players get their jobs only because they used to play professionally? Or does their experience give them a special insight into the game? If so, doesn't that apply also to her?

Women’s football is shite.  The world champions couldn’t even beat a boys team in the US.

I would rather listen to the opinions of a few mates who played non-league with me.  Much better standard of football, and much more insightful observations.

[Lighthouse]

I’m surprised this hasn’t been proposed or implemented yet but Twitter (or some rival platform) should remove the ability to @ someone and send DMs. Simplify it to you being able to tweet and whoever chooses to follow you being able to read it. I’ve never understood the desire for celebrities to open themselves up to every whack job on the planet and then complain about the strange messages they receive.

[aintforever]

You just shouldn’t be able to post anonymously. It shouldn’t be hard to ensure that the name and address of the account holder is logged on a system somewhere.

[Lighthouse]

40 minutes ago, aintforever said:

You just shouldn’t be able to post anonymously. It shouldn’t be hard to ensure that the name and address of the account holder is logged on a system somewhere.

What about all the countries where governments try to control and censor their SM? Or people who don't have passports or drivers licenses? Or simply the fact that this will just hugely inconvenience the 99% of (relatively) well behaved users and that the wrong-uns will just use fake I.D. and addresses? What about the gigantic logistical task of cross-checking the I.D. and addresses of every SM user in the world? Or the fact that people could basically just log in at some random location, do whatever they want and if they get caught say their account was hacked, or they left their computer logged in?

[aintforever]

2 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

What about all the countries where governments try to control and censor their SM? Or people who don't have passports or drivers licenses? Or simply the fact that this will just hugely inconvenience the 99% of (relatively) well behaved users and that the wrong-uns will just use fake I.D. and addresses? What about the gigantic logistical task of cross-checking the I.D. and addresses of every SM user in the world? Or the fact that people could basically just log in at some random location, do whatever they want and if they get caught say their account was hacked, or they left their computer logged in?

It’s not exactly a huge inconvenience to set up an account with a verified ID of some sort. Make Facebook and a Twitter liable for what they are broadcasting just like other media and they will soon get it sorted.

[Lord Duckhunter]

5 hours ago, egg said:

On that last point. There's playing the game, and there's playing the game to a standard. I wouldn't expect a player who's played league 2 footy to appear in mainstream TV as a pundit for 2 reasons. 1, I'd never have seen him play, and 2, he's never played at the level that he's expressing opinion about. That matters to me - if Ashley Cole starts criticising Bertrand's performance it has validity to me cos he's played that role at the highest level and I respect his opinion because of that. If Bob Smith who's played 300 games there for Chelmsford City starts to criticise I take less notice. However, if he talks about the physicality part of the game, he can at least relate to it and I'll listen. Substitute a female pundit for Bob Smith...she's never played the male game, has played at a level we can all see is much lower, and can't have a view on the physicality.

Then you have the crap that Cairney says and posts which confirm that she is struggling at this level. The Vestergaard decision, the Saka foul/dive. This is someone who couldn't have a discussion about Arsenal's situation in a game looking "ominous" as her vocabulary such that she didn't know the word. 

Cairney is miles out of her depth. 

Didn’t she also say that Chelsea would be happy with the 3 points...... After they’d won a cup game. 
 

She’s got the job solely because she’s a women. Exactly the same as the bikini clad birds in the Benny Hill show did.

[Fan The Flames]

11 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Didn’t she also say that Chelsea would be happy with the 3 points...... After they’d won a cup game. 
 

She’s got the job solely because she’s a women. Exactly the same as the bikini clad birds in the Benny Hill show did.

I'm sure she mistakenly used a short hand phrase. But if that was Chris Kamara we'd all think if was just a funny gaff. We all do it, I once at work said 'I'm going for my ejaculation', instead of inoculation.

Given that the job was for a female present her being a women is redundant, she got the job because she was a high profile woman player. I agree that shouldn't make her the most suitable person for the job and there are probably better people out there. The idea that only football people can talk about football is wrong, a lot of football chat is bollocks and some of the better stuff I listen too is with non-footballers. 

[Whitey Grandad]

9 minutes ago, Fan The Flames said:

I'm sure she mistakenly used a short hand phrase. But if that was Chris Kamara we'd all think if was just a funny gaff. We all do it, I once at work said 'I'm going for my ejaculation', instead of inoculation.

Given that the job was for a female present her being a women is redundant, she got the job because she was a high profile woman player. I agree that shouldn't make her the most suitable person for the job and there are probably better people out there. The idea that only football people can talk about football is wrong, a lot of football chat is bollocks and some of the better stuff I listen too is with non-footballers. 

What I find really annoying is that when they are a co-commentator they their inexperience leads them to think that they have to say something all the time. They won’t shut up talking. They don’t give any insights, they merely tell us what we’ve just seen. I don’t approve of violence against women but if they were sitting next time at a live match I would not hold myself responsible.

*other genders of commentators are available.

[whelk]

How has a thread on cancel culture come to hearing about sad old misogynists getting upset about female pundits? Like it was some cerebral bastion of male insight before they arrived and dumbed it down. Most punditry is inane but some old dinosaurs get so excitable when a woman makes a faux pas. I hate the way women’s football is having its prominence forced on us. Worse is the old golf club duffers wetting their pants about pundits though. Do they have same objection with golf and cricket? Female journalists? What do they know?

Edited 3 May, 2021 by whelk

[egg]

3 minutes ago, whelk said:

How has a thread on cancel culture come to hearing about sad old misogynists getting upset about female pundits? Like it was some cerebral bastion of male insight before they arrived and dumbed it down. Most punditry is inane but some old dinosaurs get so excitable when a woman makes a faux pas. I hate the way women’s football is having its prominence forced on us. Worse is the old golf club duffers wetting their pants about pundits though. Do they have same objection with golf and cricket? Female journalists? What do they know?

What have female pundits added when you've heard them, or read what they've written? 

What do they know? Not enough about the level of football that they're doing the punditry for - female players haven't played  football at the level or intensity that their male counterparts have played at. To have played at the level that you're a pundit for is a prerequisite for me. 

[whelk]

49 minutes ago, egg said:

What have female pundits added when you've heard them, or read what they've written? 

What do they know? Not enough about the level of football that they're doing the punditry for - female players haven't played  football at the level or intensity that their male counterparts have played at. To have played at the level that you're a pundit for is a prerequisite for me. 

Playing at highest level not a prerequisite for me. I’d rather listen to someone like Daniel Storey or Jacob Steinberg. I am not making the case for female pundits however it is  amusing how it makes men froth - like Keys and Gray - ‘do they even know the rules?’

Would be interesting to play back the annoying woman commentator (Sparks?) repeating the exact words of Guy Mobray and I bet there would only be comments about one.

[Lighthouse]

6 hours ago, aintforever said:

It’s not exactly a huge inconvenience to set up an account with a verified ID of some sort. Make Facebook and a Twitter liable for what they are broadcasting just like other media and they will soon get it sorted.

It’s not exactly a difficult system to get around either, for all the reasons I mentioned. As for making the platforms liable, they’ll just put a bunch of guff about abusive and offensive behaviour in their T&C which you have to click ‘I agree’ and that’s it. Sure they can delete offensive posts but only after they’ve been reported and by then the horse has bolted.

[Lord Duckhunter]

5 hours ago, Fan The Flames said:

 

Given that the job was for a female present her being a women is redundant, she got the job because she was a high profile woman player. 

So only women could apply for the job? How is that different than the Benny Hill bikini birds? I thought we’d left that behind in the last century.
 

Surely the best person  should get the job, how does being a high profile player of a different sport qualify her?

[whelk]

1 hour ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

So only women could apply for the job? How is that different than the Benny Hill bikini birds? I thought we’d left that behind in the last century.
 

Surely the best person  should get the job, how does being a high profile player of a different sport qualify her?

Often when someone is obsessed with a topic there is a deeper underlying issue. 

[Lighthouse]

Ollie Robinson suspended by the ECB over tweets he made a decade ago as a teenager and has already apologized for. Of course, if he'd drank half a bottle of vodka and driven down the M6 at 130mph, p*ssed as a newt, nobody would be bothered.

[badgerx16]

8 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

Ollie Robinson suspended by the ECB over tweets he made a decade ago as a teenager and has already apologized for. Of course, if he'd drank half a bottle of vodka and driven down the M6 at 130mph, p*ssed as a newt, nobody would be bothered.

As it is likely he was at Yorkshire CC at the time, sexism and racism would have been perfectly acceptable language and attitude.

[Turkish]

50 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

As it is likely he was at Yorkshire CC at the time, sexism and racism would have been perfectly acceptable language and attitude.

HARRY ENFIELD- THE YORKSHIREMAN - YouTube

[badgerx16]

8 minutes ago, Turkish said:

HARRY ENFIELD- THE YORKSHIREMAN - YouTube

Didn't know Harry Enfield made documentary pieces.

[SKD]

10 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

Ollie Robinson suspended by the ECB over tweets he made a decade ago as a teenager and has already apologized for. Of course, if he'd drank half a bottle of vodka and driven down the M6 at 130mph, p*ssed as a newt, nobody would be bothered.

I saw this, this morning and thought I’d check the tweets. I have to say, whilst poor taste and irresponsible, I didn’t really think they were that bad - like who would actually be offended by them!? Feels like a mountain being made out of a mole hill and everyone desperately trying to be on the right side of history. 
 

What is the outcome Of the investigation going to be? Yes he tweeted them? Is he a racist, probably not. Has his tweets really affected anyone, no. 

Edited 7 June, 2021 by SKD

[Weston Super Saint]

34 minutes ago, SKD said:

I saw this, this morning and thought I’d check the tweets. I have to say, whilst poor taste and irresponsible, I didn’t really think they were that bad - like who would actually be offended by them!? Feels like a mountain being made out of a mole hill and everyone desperately trying to be on the right side of history. 
 

What is the outcome Of the investigation going to be? Yes he tweeted them? Is he a racist, probably not. Has his tweets really affected anyone, no. 

Absolutely!

According to Michael Vaughn :

Quote

Former England captain Michael Vaughan told BBC Sport: "He has got to go away, learn and educate himself - and become a better person for it.

Because I'm sure Michael is spot on, only now will he realise, educate himself and become a better person for it, there's no way he could possibly have done that over the last 8 or 9 years when he was growing up and couldn't possibly have figured out that what he posted in 2012 was stupid without someone pointing it out to him 9 years later!  Thank heavens they've managed to catch it just in time!

[SKD]

30 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Absolutely!

According to Michael Vaughn :

Because I'm sure Michael is spot on, only now will he realise, educate himself and become a better person for it, there's no way he could possibly have done that over the last 8 or 9 years when he was growing up and couldn't possibly have figured out that what he posted in 2012 was stupid without someone pointing it out to him 9 years later!  Thank heavens they've managed to catch it just in time!

I actually thought the one about Gary speed was the worst, but obviously that has no racial undertones, so doesn’t make headlines. 

[Turkish]

who are these people seeking out social media posts from people years ago to crucify them now for it?