So I assume you were just as vocal when the Parkland kids were being targeted by the Rightwing media and their internet flunkies/sickos? Like the doctored image of Emma Gonzalez ripping apart the US constitution (the original picture was lifted from a youth magazine and showed her ripping up a shooting range target, NOT the US constitution) but sadly that was not immediately obvious for the sheeple following the right wing social media users.
Or the Fox News attacks on Emma, David, the protesters in general for things that are nowhere near as ludicrous and offensive as the youtube posts of this 14 year old are.
And there will be more attacks on children who do something conservative journalists and conservative social media warriors disagree with.
Why is it that liberals don't understand the difference between criticizing someone, and calling for them to be harmed?
Yes, you are immune to reason, that is obvious from your responses. And career? A 14 year old preaching hate and racism is not a career, it is a disgusting hobby. And I doubt any liberal will be proud of a child who preaches the disgusting things she preaches. A proud parent would rather see their child earning an honest living, you know even something like clearing blocks in sewers is a more honorable job IMHO, at least they help people deal with their crap problem and not posting crap like this girl does.
Preaching hatred is not a job, influencer is not a job, to call these things jobs is ludicrous.
Producing content on YouTube, and deriving taxable levels of income from it, is a career like any other. It'd be more correct to call it a business than a job (since there's no employer), I used the word "job" in reference to the analogy to Emma Gonzales (who, AFAIK, is not self-employed).
As for her parents, from what she's said they're actual liberals who are okay with differences of opinion. They seem to be the only ones left.
Also, posting about the disgusting opinions of this 14 year old is completely reasonable. I also could care less if she gets kicked off facebook for it.
It's YouTube, as you would know if you had read the BuzzFeed article, the Twitter thread I linked to, or even the OP itself.
It is understandable that you don't care about freedom of speech, since you live in a country that doesn't have it. However, a handful of companies deciding what people are and aren't allowed to say, is a rather new thing in America, and there are still a lot of people here who don't agree with it.
And what I cannot understand is why conservatives who speak a good game about freedom of speech whine about a journalists freedom of speech to expose hatred and immoral behavior.
Because journalists use their power and influence to inflict harm (real, quantifiable harm, like loss of income, not "I'm offended, someone protect me from opinions I don't like" pseudo-harm) on people who are comparatively powerless. They do this while pretending to be motivated by altruism. They are a scourge on society and beneath contempt. We would all be better off if they were forced to work in sewers, if nothing else they would be in a more fitting environment.
It happens, in this case, that the attacks by BuzzFeed (and the other media outlets that have piled on in the meantime) have backfired. Her subscriber base on YouTube is now close to a million, and she's now making over $3,000 a month. However, that doesn't change the fact that the media's motive was pure malice and envy (most of these journos probably spent high school smoking weed and goofing off, they're filled with rage at the thought that one of the "deplorables" is actually making something of herself at that age, thereby outdoing them).
