The Spectrum forum is the political area of the forum where we allow more of a debate and therefore take a lighter glove to moderating.
1 Like
Donāt put words in my mouth , like I said I will do my own scholarly research , I donāt need to read Wikipedia and news articles.
And like I said I feel this particular topic has been done to death so I wonāt engage with it and will focus on discussing on whatās next for Karlās podcast and what he does from here with it.
I certainly agree, itās been done to death but Iām feeling you agree with what Stefanovic did as you donāt want to hear what a creep Robinson is. Unlike you I couldnāt care less how his podcast goes. Iām sure itāll be ok, there are enough ultra right wing and racists to keep him in business. If heās needing money Iām sure Gina will help!
2 Likes
White supremacy is a big claim. Where is the evidence ?
Piers Morgan recently explained the reason behind why he invited Andrew Tate onto his show, it was to let people hear his views firsthand and understand why he thinks the way he does.
That didnāt mean Morgan endorsed Tateās opinions but it gave viewers the opportunity to make up their own minds.
Journalism shouldnāt be about telling people what to think or presenting only one side of a story, regardless of how unpopular or controversial someone may be. Its role is to inform, question, and allow the audience to make up their own minds. If we move away from that, we risk drifting toward censorship rather than open discussion.
Karl could have challenged Robinson more on his past if he wanted to, but that wasnāt the focus of the interview. The discussion was centred on a specific topic.
2 Likes
I see the problem, right there at Piers explaining others, itās a kabaal. Like Kelloggs , yes you have choices,like, corn flakes, cocopops frootloops etc. But when your only choices are rubbish you wind up with 4 teeth rooting for the guy with 4 yachts
Journalists pull stuff apart, not fall in line for the rage baiting dollars ,using their media skills to make it look like they are actually doing journalism is going to the dark side.
First Google result: How Tommy Robinson Disguises White Supremacism In the Coded Language of Anti-Islam Politics
A sensible explanation of how he is able to get away with it by using barely-disguised language, very thoroughly backed up by research
That right there just proved my point, that people will say things like this when they donāt believe in whoās being interviewed.
1 Like
āFirst Google resultā isnāt exactly a high evidentiary bar.
I read the article. Itās an opinion piece, not evidence. It argues that Tommy Robinson uses coded language associated with white supremacist ideas, but it provides no direct evidence that he is a white supremacist or explicitly advocates white supremacy. Those are two very different claims. Calling someone a white supremacist is a serious factual allegation. Iād expect direct evidence, not just an interpretation of language.
1 Like
If youāre waiting for him to say āI am a white supremacistā youāre living in a dreamland, and you yourself are applying fancy intellectual academic neutral high-minded language to this situation to get out of the truth which is right in front of you
Youāve presented an opinion piece as though it were evidence. Iāve read the article, and Iāve watched a lot of Tommy Robinson. I think heās many things, and I think itās entirely possible he holds anti-Muslim views despite saying otherwise. But I havenāt seen clear evidence that he is a white supremacist. Thatās a serious allegation, and I think it requires clear, credible evidence rather than opinion or inference. The source is also left leaning so not entirely a nuetral source.
There is plenty of evidence that these movements have learned to express themselves in codes which make it harder for them to be explicitly prosecuted. Even the wearing of a Helly Hansen jacket (āHHā for Heil Hitler) is something they have started doing; if pressed, someone like you comes along and says, āWell, thereās no direct evidence. It could be a coincidence. You might be overreading.ā Theyāre counting on that because they thrive on an āIām not touching youā approach. In Robinsonās case itās barely subtle and is so well-documented youād have to be deliberately ignorant not to see it.
Just the other week I heard someone call the Nightlife quiz on the ABC and disingenuously guess the number ā1488ā as the answer to a question. I knew immediately that this was a reference to the Fourteen Words. It is a meme among white supremacist communities to try to spread this number out in the community as much as possible. They slip it in wherever they can, and they know if somebody points it out, well, ātheyāre just numbers, maybe youāre the crazy one, seeing coded messages everywhere, thereās no direct evidence etc.ā And so this doesnāt get flagged, and it goes to air nationally and nobody says anything. The āOKā gesture is another example of this.
This is the reality of white supremacy in the 21st century and how it has learned to adapt, itās not a binary of it either explicitly saying what it is or quietly agreeing to go away. So the same logic is applied to āIslamā, āinvaderā, āSomaliā etc etc, which I think that very thoroughly researched āopinion pieceā documents.
If you seriously think we need to wait around for them to start saying āI am a white supremacistā before we start calling them out, you are actually helping their cause
I can see evidence that Tommy Robinson is strongly anti-Islam and highly critical of immigration. Whether that makes him a white supremacist is a separate question, and I think that allegation requires evidence that he advocates racial superiority.
Regardless, Iām perfectly comfortable with Karl Stefanovic interviewing someone like this. In fact, I think thatās exactly what the media should be doing. People with controversial views should be questioned, challenged, pressed on inconsistencies, and held to account.
Where I probably agree with you is that I donāt think Karl really did that at all. The interview felt more like a friendly chat than a rigorous examination, and that was a missed opportunity, and exceptionally weak journalism
A less charitable read of the situation would not assume good faith on Karlās part, and see it as a deliberate endorsement of Robinsonās views. It makes sense. Heās gaming the algorithm and thatās whatās come up. It happens all the time. It pushes both audience and host further and further to the right
Well Gosh I use the 
emoji every day and often in selfies. Am I in trouble?
Thatās what Iām saying. This is the ambiguity they are counting on. They have learned to evade hate speech laws by means like this. Everyday things that could be innocent. It is well-documented that that is the reality of the movement
Karl would not be the first person to hold anti Islam views if so.
Then so be it. Humans have been speaking in secret code for centuries. We canāt make everything illegal - If people hold these inappropriate views we should challenge them grill them debate them.
Iām gay - I never really hate people for homophobic views. Itās learnt and taught behaviour. Instead I invite them to a discussion or debate which they normally lose.
1 Like
I think the OK thing was just them trying to make out that an innocuous gesture meant something more? Certainly itās not something anyone who doesnāt live online would know or care about.
I also think maybe the arguing over whether he is a white supremacist or not is perhaps a distraction? There are plenty of other horrible things we can say about him, for which we have slam-dunk evidence. Heās definitely a thug, with a criminal history as long as your forearm. Hell, āTommy Robinsonā isnāt even his real name!
2 Likes
Changed from Stephen Yaxley-Lennon to conceal his identity and previous convictions.