Hacker News Reader

Comment by drak0n1c | Hacker News Reader

This week in Seattle, a popular weatherman on local NPR radio was fired for a post on his personal blog, where he criticized violent rioters and compared the chilling effects of their targeted property damage to historical examples, such as Kristallnacht.

He has no record of "hateful views of women, LGBTQIAA2S+, and minorities" and the post itself did not contain such either.

The blog post in question: https://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2020/08/seattle-city-in-fear-...

View on HN

fwiw a quick googling of this guy shows that he’s had his weather segments cancelled before on other networks, and by his own admission it’s because he veers off topic from weather and into controversy (E.g. climate change denial)

Frankly, comparing anything to Kristallnacht which isn't actually related to the deliberate destruction of a people is offensive.

People weren’t being deliberately destroyed at the early stages when Kristallnacht occurred either. I believe that’s the reasoning behind why prominent activists and lawmakers (rightly or wrongly) compared federal actions in Portland to the Nazi Gestapo and such a comparison wasn’t seen as offensive and they weren’t cancelled. The idea of recognizing warning signs.

For the record, I’m Jewish and don’t see such comparisons as offensive. It’s good to try to learn from historical similarities, however faint.

Abusing the word 'offensive' by applying it to expressions you happen to disagree with is a significant part of the problem. While you might not agree with the comparison to Kristallnacht that does not mean he caused you to be upset or hurt your feelings - which is the dictionary definition of the non-military meaning of the word offensive. He just said something you don't agree with, something which is bound to happen in a free society where free speech is the norm.

The way the word offensive is used here is offensive in the military way since it is meant as an attack which is supposed to silence the person who spoke those words.

Free speech should be defended not for those people you agree with but for those you disagree with.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com