Titles like the above are likely the reason that news outlets like Vox and Vice have fallen on hard times.
It’s a shame really - both outlets have done some seriously groundbreaking work, but this...this is just cheap outrage-bait for clicks.
Pretty much the definition of shortsightedness. They are killing their reputation long term to get ad clicks today.
What seems obviously broken is the fact that ideals like free speech, free association, due process, etc. have taken a backseat to some new rules like inclusivity, hyper sensitivity and hyper empathy.
That is dangerous for society. It has happened before in so many theocracies. A very vocal group seems to have seized the reins of all mainstream media and technology companies in areas like "trust and safety", which always seem to morph into propaganda outfits.
By displacing to a large extent judeo Christian values, for all their faults, perhaps in education and elsewhere, it looks like something far more broken, dangerous and sinister has filled the void left by it.
As a result the new crop of young talent seems to be attracted to these new "woke" companies like vice and vox who are pandering to their misguided ideas of the world.
So hypothetically if you say the wrong terminology to refer to a group of people, then you have blasphemed and regardless of context your use of the terminology deprives you of due process, presumption of innocence and freedom of speech. Anyone who defends you has their freedom of association revoked.
Stories like these seem to be becoming more and more common. The dark and sinister replacement seem to be a new set of rules whose goal is to protect people from certain blasphemies. At one time it was the sun revolving around the earth or denial if the ressurrection of Christ. Today it's some forbidden phrase like Merry Christmas or handicapped or midget. If you are the CEO of Firefox or Oculus rift, you are fired for your charitable donations. Freedom of association is far more important to society than the harm done by a CEO who blasphemes or pays people to blaspheme.
Judeo-Christian values are hard to pin down, but I feel confident that the 15th century Catholic Church did not reflect those values.
I'm just offering the Reformation as evidence that even people in the 1500s didn't consider the behavior of the Catholic Church at that time "good".
Edit: As the responses point out, people don't all agree about values. I didn't mean to imply otherwise.
The Spanish Inquisition (unlike the Papal Inquisitions, or the later Roman Inquisition) occurred under the aegis exclusivelt of the Spanish Crown; and “Judeo-Christian values” are most often cited as a thing by evangelical and fundamentalist Protestants trying to pretend that their views (often quite personal and not even broad enough to be sectarian) have some kind of broader grounding than can be justified factually.
> Judeo-Christian values are hard to pin down
Because “Judeo-Christian values” aren't actually a thing.
Also considering that Christianity is a rejection of many of the values and norms of Judaism.
> What seems obviously broken is the fact that ideals like free speech, free association, due process, etc. have taken a backseat to some new rules like inclusivity, hyper sensitivity and hyper empathy.
"As an insider" it seems like this as well. Not everyone in America falls so far on either side that we can't see this.
If you are not familiar with it see the section on religion morality and education
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Washington%27s_Farewe...
> If you are not familiar with it see the section on religion morality and education
Am having a hard time seeing how the idea that morality can't be maintained without religion connects to "free speech, free association [and] due process".
Much of the new culture I am referring to, seems to elevate the rights of groups and treat individuals as unequal because all people are born unequal depending on the group they belong to - the exact opposite of what the country was founded on and believed for a long time. It isn't untrue because people are born to vastly different circumstances that have a big impact on their long-term success in society. This seems to have become a sacred cow, i.e. a new set of religious principles.
How this plays out in this particular context is that when Pewdiepie uses his YouTube channel to make amusing videos, if he touches on certain blasphemous topics, then regardless of context, he is convicted as having "ties to white supremacists". His rights as an individual are deprioritized because the subject matter is blasphemous to the new value system, which places a very high priority on protection of the sentiments of minorities.
This is an exceptionally great goal, but freedom, due process and presumption of innocence of the individual must come first, if the goal is to create a fair and stable society, in my opinion.
Bingo.
A good quote - "A society which is based on the letter of the law and never reaches any higher is taking very scarce advantage of the high level of human possibilities. The letter of the law is too cold and formal to have a beneficial influence on society. Whenever the tissue of life is woven of legalistic relations, there is an atmosphere of moral mediocrity, paralyzing man's noblest impulses. And it will be simply impossible to stand through the trials of this threatening century with only the support of a legalistic structure."