General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Suck it up, Snowden-haters: New Yorker on "Why Citizenfour Deserved Its Oscar" [View all]MADem
(135,425 posts)The actual title of the article would have worked just fine, and maybe encouraged more productive conversation.
This kind of stuff is just unhelpful. Starting out with an exhortation to "Choose Sides" about whether an award should be given is a poor tactic if anyone wants genuine discussion. The AWARD, which is for the film MAKERS, is a separate issue from the conduct of the subject of the film or one's approval/disapproval of what he did, but the subject line convolutes the two issues. One can love the film and hate the "star" of it, or love the "star" and hate the film--they don't HAVE to go together, but this thread demands otherwise.
We'll never know, in this thread, anyway, if there was any real "discussion" to be had about the AWARD given by the MPAAS--never mind Snowden's actions--because the well has been pretty much poisoned by the subject line framing of the article.
Your last sentence sounds a lot like "You're with 'im, or agin' 'im." We'd really "all be better off without their 'discussion' anyway?" Only praise is allowed? No dissent? Everyone go along with the program? There's only one acceptable point of view? Hmm. See how you sound? Hint: Not good.
You can choose to try to elevate the discourse, or not. I can't demand, but I can--and will--point out.