What Went Wrong With… Azealia Banks & The Mainstream Media’s Double Standards On Freedom Of Speech?

An image of the Twitter logo with the mouth covered to illustrate that Azealia Banks has been suspended from Twitter. By

This week, Azealia Banks was suspended from Twitter following a racist and homophobic diatribe aimed at One Direction’s Zayn Malik, but for me this was an example of double standards by the mainstream media. If you’re a regular on Twitter, you’ll know all too well that it only takes a single hashtag concerning the Middle East, immigration, or gay rights for hundreds and thousands of offensive and bigoted tweets to pop up. There have been so many occasions when I’ve been confronted with horridly insulting and abusive content on social media platforms, especially Twitter, and those user accounts never seem to get suspended. So that begs the question; how can numerous far-right accounts get away with inciting violence against minorities and how can some misogynist arseholes be allowed to threaten women with rape, but Azealia Banks isn’t allowed to spout her prejudice nonsense?

Just to point out, I detest Azealia Banks and I think what she said was deplorable not to mention illogical, and hypocritical, but although I found her racism and homophobia offensive surely she has the same rights as groups such as the EDL? The mainstream media as a whole seems to have a few inconsistencies when it comes to their stance on bigotry, they tolerate certain groups or allow certain people to say whatever they like but at the same time they berate others for doing exactly the same thing. When it comes to fame, they also have a few celebrity pets that get instantly and perpetually defended, certain celebrities are free to make racist songs for instance (Marshall ahem… Mathers) but whereas people like this get a free pass to do and say whatever the fuck they want, others don’t.

There’s loads of people out there I don’t like, and I don’t approve of many things people say and do, but as long as they have the right to say what they want, I also have the right to say what I want, it works both ways. Twitter has chosen to ban Azealia Banks but at the same time they host many hateful tweets, I’ve seen and read some of the most offensive, most horrid opinions regarding African Americans, Muslims, transsexuals (insert minority here), in fact there’s far, far worse out there than Banks’ bullshit. Yes she’s a venomous, hate-filled bitch, but people should be left to express their prejudice viewpoint so we have proof of what they’re really like. Twitter like many social media platforms has a terms of service, but they can’t pick and choose who they apply it to, if they suspend Azealia Banks then why not Katie Hopkins? You could argue incitement, and yes Banks should have chosen her words a little more carefully, but did she really incite any racial hatred? The USA are already drone-bombing half the world, Azealia’s tweets aren’t going to strengthen the concepts of militarism and jingoism, and when it comes to the general public, people who are prejudice are going to remain that way and so are the kind, peaceful folk, a few nasty tweets aren’t going to change someone’s world view.

I don’t know about you, but I’d rather know when someone has a prejudice idea or a bigoted opinion, if you start to censor people, the opinion or statement itself doesn’t disappear, only your view of it. We’re not fucking ostriches; hiding your head in the sand won’t make prejudice go away, let it out and then highlight the stupidity, call out the person for being ignorant or hateful, but don’t ban them, or are we living in a fascist society?

So back to Azealia Banks, thanks to her Twitter account we now know that she’s quite ugly on the inside despite being quite attractive on the outside, and I only know this because I was privy to her Tweets, isn’t it a good thing that we get to know a little more about a celebrities’ thoughts and feelings? That way we can make a better and more informed decision when we’re being targeted by their products. Because of her bigoted tweets I’m not going to purchase any of her music, but if her opinions were suppressed I may have wasted my money on a racist, homophobic, sellout. So I reiterate, yes Banks is quite cute, especially if you like scrawny, horse-teethed, flat-arsed, flat-chested skanks from Harlem… and sentences like that only exist thanks to free speech. As long as words don’t literally call for physical violence, we shouldn’t be censoring them. If you agree with the concept of freedom, then everybody has the right to say anything they please, If and when you disagree with something you then also have the right to say anything back. If you allow the media to hush certain people, it’ll only be a matter of time before they hush you too.

Free Dumb.

5 replies »

  1. The media and social media outlets are controlled by a few power play individuals. So long as you fit the correct victim status code dress. Eg the so called reverse racism outfit, homosexual outfit, culture vulture, Israel situation, right and far right wing media and politics. You can say whatever you like and you be supported and championed for your views and crusades.

    Speak the truth on oppression, racism, fascism, history, being proud of heterosexual lifestyle, police and state violence and political corruption. Etc… You are deemed enemy of the state and the programmed sheeple attack you droves.

    The likes of Kate Hopkins… Supported by Daily Mail paper.. A national institution media outlet regularly spewing hatred and powder keg material to incite racial breakdown.

    As stupid as Azelia Banks is, your article breaks this down to simple obvious observations and the system structure behind that calls for her muting and not of others who actually spew worse in mainstream media and culture.

    Those controlling gate keepers of media platforms certainly don’t look like any azalea on the board of directors or any melanated or brown persons for that matter.

    They suit and tailor public perception to what suits them and what can or can’t be perpuated for the mass sheeples brain programming consumption.

  2. Exactly! The right to freedom of speech should always be protected, even if the person in question spews blatant prejudice. Suspending someone from social media is censorship. It does not help reduce prejudice, it only hides it. What happened to Azealia Banks is an example of censorship and political correctness. If someone wants to be prejudice, let them. Let them expose themselves. I rather have an honest racist right wing asshole than a fake fuck pretending to be for equality. The Mainstream Media are complete hypocrites for banning Banks, but allowing Karie Hopkins. Despite the hypocrisies, freedom of Speech must be protected!

    • Thanks for the info, I knew about the lemming myth but I wasn’t aware of this. Apparently seeing ostriches dig holes for their nest/put their head in the holes to turn their eggs is where this myth was born, but regardless, I won’t be using that metaphor from now on.

  3. Sweet, I never knew Ostriches dug holes for their nests, am pleased to learn that. Loving the site by the way, by far the most entertaining thing I’ve stumbled upon for some time.

What Went Wrong Or Right With This Article? (spam & shite will be deleted)

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.