source

I still remember a time, not that long ago when we had the ability to talk about a subject. Even the tough subjects and to have an opinion. Right or wrong at least once you spoke your mind it could be debated, it could be argued and a reasonable balance found. How can you educate people if you can't hear their point of view. How can you be educated if you keep your views to yourself?

I find it a very scary proposition that we are only allowed to follow one train of thought and if we express an opposite one it will be held against us.If we dare to think differently from the approved narrative then we are a fair target for ridicule and aggression.

Gordon Strachan - Sky Sports

The latest example of it for me happened just at the weekend. It was a statement made on a sports show by a former football player and current pundit Gordon Strachan. He happened to make the statement on a panel show called "The Debate" ironically enough and by that evening had been fired and reported that he would never work on Sky Sports again. In a brief shot from sportsjoe.ie

Gordon Strachan has apologised for "any unintended distress caused" after he was axed by Sky Sports following his controversial remarks on sex offender Adam Johnson and the racist abuse black footballers receive. Strachan's comments came during an episode of the Sky Sports show The Debate, with the former Scotland manager answering a question on Johnson's potential return to football posed by Geoff Shreeves with the answer:

"We're talking vile abuse and things like that. Let's say he goes out onto the pitch and people start calling him names, are going to do the same as with the racist situation? Is it alright to call him names now after doing his three years? Are we going to allow that to happen?"

Now while I agree he stated the argument very poorly. All he tried to speak on was the level of abuse that is thrown at football players. Will the same effort be put in place to combat abuse against this former convict as there has been against players receiving racist abuse??
A reasonable question for a debate show.

Not according to the wider media as instantly articles showed up calling for his head. What I see most of the time however, is that no matter which media corporations start the trial and call racism, sexism, fascism......

If you read the comments section by the general public, opinion is always opposite to the articles. The general public don't agree with this restricted, politically correct narrative being pushed by the media. They want the freedom to say these things. The freedom to debate the statement.

My real problem here is that if his statement or question was so wrong, so unreasonable as to fire him on the spot then why is it not topic for debate. If there are people with views so terrible that they cannot be spoken out loud how do we educate them? Rehabilitate them?
By shouting them down and hiding it, that will not change their views. They will just hide it better and be more careful where they speak it. They will find like minded people and spread that view amongst them.

Or could we not talk about why it is wrong. Show the world the right side of the argument and leave others in no doubt as to the reasons behind this. Bring it into the open and not let it fester in the wrong places?

Who makes the rules?

So who is pushing the narrative. Who is controlling these media outlets and stories that go against public opinion and shoot down all opposition??

It's hard to say exactly but unless people start to talk about it and stand up against the restrictions of free speech it won't be long until we start to face laws against our opinions or dissent against accepted perspective. And where are we then?
Communist China with it's internet restrictions.
North Korea with it's maniac dictatorship.
30's Europe with it's fascist movements.

Nobody able to stick their head above the wall for fear of being shot down? Facing jail for publishing dissent against government policies?

You might think that this is a stretch and how could that happen in the modern world but history repeats itself. Power comes down to money and influence and whomsoever holds power makes the rules. With enough people on the same side that can be us but divided all the power rests with the government.

I live in Europe and have seen a lot that worries me in the past few years. Not only the media censorship of our thoughts and speech but now the governments actions too.

General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) changes the rules on data protection. The GDPR and the law enforcement Directive provide for significant reforms to current data protection rules. They provide for higher standards of data protection for individuals and impose increased obligations on organisations that process personal data. They also increase the range of possible sanctions for infringements of these rules.
Ref

Article 13: If you're not into reading legal text, it essentially means sites sites that host user-generated content become legally liable for the copyrighted material it hosts. Article 13 will compel any website to remove infringing content and show they took prior care to prohibit the upload of anything protected by copyright - failure to comply would likely lead to a fine.
Ref:

Just as a though to finish off,

The boiling frog is a fable describing a frog being slowly boiled alive. The story is that if a frog is put suddenly into boiling water, it will jump out from the heat, but if the frog is put in warm water and brought to a boil it will not realise the danger and will get cooked to death. The story a metaphor for the inability or unwillingness of people to react to or be aware of sinister threats that arise gradually rather than suddenly.