We've banned this account for using HN primarily for ideological battle. That's not ok, regardless of what ideology you're batting for or against. Please don't create accounts to break HN's rules with.
No good outcomes come from attacking comedians. At best it appeals to the people that already agreed with, most likely it takes those that held no opinion to associating your group with having no sense of humor. Sure you can potentially harm some comedian you don't like, but it is sad so many people see this as a "victory". It is far better to support and evangelize the comedians you want to see more of.
> Several of you have also asked where we draw the line on hate. We don’t allow titles on Netflix that are designed to incite hate or violence, and we don’t believe The Closer crosses that line. I recognize, however, that distinguishing between commentary and harm is hard, especially with stand-up comedy which exists to push boundaries.
Hmmm, strange I don't find that same level of boundary pushing content and critical commentary of black American culture on Netflix.
Oh right, his wife, Nicole Avant, is a black American.
Freedom of speech & wide range of opinion unless it's uncomfortable to him or his loved ones.
Yeah, the headline is technically true, but maybe doesn't tell the whole story.
It'd be like if an employee saved some kittens but then slapped someone's butt, and the headline is "$company fired employee who saved kittens". Not that I'm comparing kitten-saving or butt-slapping with whatever those employees did.
But to speculate and judge (hey this is the Internet after all), if they wanted to attend some meeting my guess is they thought themselves to be warriors trying to confront the evil transphobic (in their mind) corporation...
"“We repeatedly provide a platform for content that is harmful to the trans community,” wrote a current employee in Netflix’s open Q&A document. “These decisions have a material impact on our business, including harm to our current employees and talent declining to work with us."
If you wanted to field an argument that's actually not a bad one. i guess you can make the point that the reputational damage done to the company and the premium paid for talent if the platform is perceived as spreading hate far outweighs the revenue from one or a handful of shows.
It is interesting. The tweet itself is very benign byTwitter rolling dumpster fire standards. But I think it is intended to send a message. You are an employee, not a PR representative for Netflix. If you shit where you eat, we don't need you here.
"Netflix then suspended Field along with two other employees for trying to attend a director-level meeting they weren’t invited to."
That is why I said the tweet was benign and probably just added fuel to the fire. I think I am justified in saying they were suspended for it given the close proximity to the other likely event.
I don’t think it’s justified at all. It’s an assumption that the tweet matter at all. Could just be literally suspended relating to them attempting to crash the meeting. We don’t know.
I assume that Netflix hired this people to work in Netflix, not to unilaterally start a revolution taking profit of the platform resources and Netflix image.
You can have interesting things to say, but confusing your boss and your company with your megaphone is a big mistake.
Genuinely asking: Is it common for people to be suspended for trying to attend a meeting they don't have access to? I'm not in a corporate environment so I don't actually know. I'm asking this because two other people were suspended for doing that, according to the article, and I'm curious why those two people weren't just given a finger-waggle treatment.
This wasn't a generic meeting - this was a quarterly event with hundreds of the top leaders at the company where they debate strategy and can see early access to financials (read: material to stock price). Invites are not just randomly handed out to anyone interested.
Joining a generic meeting might be ok if you have a legitimate reason. But not this meeting.
The Closer pokes fun at Jews, trans people, white people, black people, gay people and everyone in between. There's plenty of jokes in there about classes I'm in. I wasn't offended, it was hilarious. If you want to be treated like a normal person, you have to be able to take a joke like anyone else can. The trans uproar about this only serves to solidify the status of the community as perpetually offended and unreasonable.
J.K. Rowling highlights some very valid concerns about GD treatments and receives an avalanche of serious death threats from the trans community.
It's pretty clear who's terrible here. The rabid activists who stop at nothing to tear down those who disagree.
21 comments
[ 1.7 ms ] story [ 57.9 ms ] threadhttps://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Since when is comedy about finding something to agree with? I watch comedians to laugh. Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't.
> Several of you have also asked where we draw the line on hate. We don’t allow titles on Netflix that are designed to incite hate or violence, and we don’t believe The Closer crosses that line. I recognize, however, that distinguishing between commentary and harm is hard, especially with stand-up comedy which exists to push boundaries.
Hmmm, strange I don't find that same level of boundary pushing content and critical commentary of black American culture on Netflix.
Oh right, his wife, Nicole Avant, is a black American.
Freedom of speech & wide range of opinion unless it's uncomfortable to him or his loved ones.
So, while it's true that the employee has been suspended, it doesn't seem to be for the reason the headline suggests.
It'd be like if an employee saved some kittens but then slapped someone's butt, and the headline is "$company fired employee who saved kittens". Not that I'm comparing kitten-saving or butt-slapping with whatever those employees did.
But to speculate and judge (hey this is the Internet after all), if they wanted to attend some meeting my guess is they thought themselves to be warriors trying to confront the evil transphobic (in their mind) corporation...
If you wanted to field an argument that's actually not a bad one. i guess you can make the point that the reputational damage done to the company and the premium paid for talent if the platform is perceived as spreading hate far outweighs the revenue from one or a handful of shows.
You know... like most companies work in US?
"Netflix then suspended Field along with two other employees for trying to attend a director-level meeting they weren’t invited to."
That is why I said the tweet was benign and probably just added fuel to the fire. I think I am justified in saying they were suspended for it given the close proximity to the other likely event.
You can have interesting things to say, but confusing your boss and your company with your megaphone is a big mistake.
Joining a generic meeting might be ok if you have a legitimate reason. But not this meeting.
A what?
J.K. Rowling highlights some very valid concerns about GD treatments and receives an avalanche of serious death threats from the trans community.
It's pretty clear who's terrible here. The rabid activists who stop at nothing to tear down those who disagree.