This whole cancel culture myth

what about this one?

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/22/arts/design/sfmoma-gary-garrels-resignation.html

Those of a conservative nature, can you stop being outraged at liberals for a second and answer Medhi's question here?

Could start a thread of its own accord as to whether the attempts to prevent CRT type content being taught in schools is cancel culture or not. I'm guessing Greg and others would say definitely not.

What version of reality have you been looking at?

The right literally want to stop access to abortion full stop,, they want to stop more accurate teaching of history, they want to ignore climate change, many of them still would like to restrict access to marriage for same sex couples, they want the market to set the rules for society, they want to give more money to police than they do to social care or mental health or education programs, they think people should go in to debt to access life saving healthcare and they react to requests for a conversation about gun control by telling people they can take the guns from their cold dead hands?

What conversations do those on the left not want to have?

Edited to add. Just saw the posts you just put on another thread in response to someone asking for a specific service. You've some neck on you to talk about the Left having no intention of having a conversation about anything and to come out with posts like that. It's the 'accuse others of that which you are guilty' conservative mantra 101 that we see time and time again isn't it.

It must be exhausting for some folk to be afraid of this mythical “left menace” all the time. Terrified some blue haired enby will jump out from under the bed and force them to kiss a guy.

Probably more afraid they’ll like it.

Who do you think should be given airtime to counter Paul Murphy and PBP in your view? Be specific please.

What constitutes endless coverage of DP stories? Again, be specific, there's certainly occasional stories, but you used the phrase endless.

Frequently on here it is said that RTE are only mouthpieces for the government, if that were the case, don't you think that they would be more than capable of countering any narrative about DP being an unpleasant situation? Even if it wasn't on RTE, the government are still more than capable of putting it out there that such stories are exaggerating if not outright false.

RTE nor anyone outside of the asylum application authorities have any right to judge someone's claim as being false. On what basis do you think they are entitled to do so?

In terms of Paul Murphy's airtime, I think he would argue that he is pushing against the tide in terms of the volume of contributors, commentators, journalists in the media that give tacit agreement to things carrying on as normal. There's no shortage of articles talking about the benefits of corporate investment for example. If he is so impactful, why then is he still talking about the same issues without having seen significant, if indeed any change with respect to them over the years. It would seem to me, that the likes of David Quinn is as frequent a commentator on Irish media as Paul Murphy and he has zero electoral justification for being there.

I'd wager the reason he isn't elected is probably because his views aren't as generally accepted as Murphy's are.