Not only that, but they're the official Olympic broadcaster in the USA! Around 22m watched it on their broadcast services, and a further 3m on streaming.
In reality, an overwhelming majority of Americans watching the opening ceremony were doing so via NBC.
I'm as critical as the US as they come, in fact I just cancelled my summer trip to the Appalachia, but seeing this as censorship is reading a bit too far, simpler explanations exist (crowd noises are dimmed by audio filters)
Who to believe?
That being said, I'm in the US and I heard boos on the delayed broadcast.
> “we live in fictitious times with a fictitious president”
it was 2003, but oh, dear Michael, if only you knew what the future would be like...
Filtering out boos doesn't seem to be an issue from a technical standpoint. It was done recently with Donald Trump at the US Open Tennis:
https://bimcmedia.com/booing-trump-at-the-us-open-tv-audienc...
"The USTA’s decision to comply with the White House’s wishes and shield Trump’s self-presentation from noise is hardly understandable. The British Guardian called it in tennis jargon an “unforced error” – a fault without necessity. The US Open are actually the Grand Slam tournament that cares least about etiquette."
I have showdead set to yes, and while so some articles get a gray color and an occasional [flagged] tag, everything is still searchable[0]. The only form of censorship is the ordering in the news list, but I could pick any other list[1] if I wanted to.
[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/front
That's why I tend to search top in the last day and week. Specifically to catch flagged articles like this, since at least the votes don't get undone.
Some may regard this as off topic, but censorship seems to be a recurring subject and regularly discussed.
This reminds me of my Dutch friend who is prone to exaggeration to make things sound dramatic and scary to outsiders, and frequently claims the Netherlands is a "narco state" - big "Nederlandse hiphop: Ik kom van de straat" energy going on here.
Well I think there is definitely WAY too much drugs here. Definitely not as bad as California, but I've lived in Eindhoven for a while and people could just put their car window open a bit and text a certain number and get it delivered to their car! Also I've met plenty of students who took XTC during parties and thought it was all fine. When I said something about it they called me a "moral knight". Guess I'm old fashion.
"So other heads are also flamable. Do you think your head isn't?"
Something potentially happening elsewhere doesn't invalidate it being pointed out. In fact if Von der Leyen got booed in China and a Geeman broadcaster muted it, I would also like to know what was ommited.
* https://www.splcenter.org/resources/hatewatch/attacks-history-timeline-trump-administration/
* https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-admin-removes-memorial-honoring-people-enslaved-george/story?id=129472615
* https://www.americanprogress.org/article/the-trump-administration-is-erasing-american-history-told-by-public-lands-and-waters/
It feels like people inventing this story, farming for followers on socials by manufacturing outrage. And a close read of the article will uncover that it was denied by the networks.
This needs a deeper dig before opinions be formed - especially given the vehement denials of manipulation by the broadcasters.
But until then, citation needed.
More anti-American propaganda on HN. Why does this keep happening? This is not news, nor is it relevant for HN.
But feel free to elaborate why you feel wanting the US population to be able to see how their political leadership is perceived elsewhere is "anti-US" — cause I would describe it as the exact opposite.
Seeing the 100th "U.S. government bad - please believe us this time" story from yet another activist-masquerading-as-journalist post from The Guardian (UK) ending up on the same website where technologists discuss innovations in tech and science is the real travesty here.
Kinda daft not to assume this has been the case for a long time already
Was hard not to imagine that was a deliberate choice.
But to each their own.
You can check it out - the first couple of minutes here of people in nurse costumes standing by beds and moving around a bit. Not really must see stuff. https://youtu.be/ReJjvlipXpM
It's still important to call them out for all the onlookers, but he goal in suc discussions should not be to try and convince the other party in these cases. They at best don't care and are going all on vibes, and at worst knowingly contradict because their goal is also onlookers.
Well, at least the censorship was not paid by tax payer money… unlike the propaganda bit by the British, that was fully paid by taxpayer money.
Feel free to censor it on your end if you find the very idea dangerous.
Are they? I mean, if it’s such a great idea and universally loved, it’s weird it needs to be imposed by force. Doesn’t it?
The original idea of state exists to ensure 3 things:
- Protection of the territory of the state
- Protection of the integrity of the individual citizen
- Protection of the private property of the citizen
This is why people started organizing in societies and allowing the existence of a ruler class. These 3 things.
You will always need some amount of military to be part of the state. But what most countries waste today (the USA for instance), is pornographic. The state should only be allowed (by taxation) enough military to defend their territory, not to exert control over the all planet like the USA wants to do.
EDIT: Yeah, I should have guessed the part of the "integrity of the individual citizen" would, of course, be twisted. No, it's not protection of the individual from disease of from his own stupidity or lack of ability. It just means the role of the state is to ensure the citizen is protected from deliberate harm from another individual.
Let's be honest here. You know the NHS (and various equivalents across the world) go way, way beyond this.
And I'm not even against the existence of a public funded health service within limits. But this is just phonographic. In my country (and from what I've read in the NHS it's relatively similar), in the past 10 years we added more than 90% medical doctors and nurses to the national NHS. The budget for the local NHS increased by 72% in that same period.
And the service has become absolutely terrible and now people (the ones that only benefit from it but don't pay the costs) are asking to raise taxes even more to put even more money into the problem.
Naa, enough is enough. I don't want to support this crap.
Now it's mostly a jobs program for poor people plus pork for politicians to throw at their favored contractors/companies. Can't really be eliminated without political suicide because too many mouths are fed off of it and will make it their mission every waking moment to damn anyone who tries to do it.
Since prevention is a lot cheaper than cure we're trying to avoid the same mistake with other things rather than commit political supuku on things that already exist.
It should probably be challenged because it's a clear religious discrimination. I looked seriously at renouncing my right to social security but eventually I found out they've gamed the system in favor of a few insular religions.
It's far from perfect but no propaganda is ever required, just direct experience.
So what's the problem here?
Aren't you tired of being so angry at the wrong stuff? Such an exhausting way to live.
You just proved my point.
Unfortunately, I don't live in the bubble.
So yeah, seems exhausting, being mad at it all because you can't think in specifics, just a general sense of madness and outrage at a black hole of frustration.
Unfortunately you live in that bubble.
Sorry you live in a broken society, maybe do something to change it.
So its not propaganda in the way you are thinking of.
Will they? Possibly a portion of them, but I doubt they'll be the majority.