170 pointsby treetalker6 hours ago11 comments
  • blell6 hours ago
    > The real risk for American broadcasters is not that dissent will be visible. It is that audiences will start assuming anything they do not show is being hidden

    Kinda daft not to assume this has been the case for a long time already

    • Twirrim6 hours ago
      The opening ceremony for the London 2012 Olympics included a celebration of the National Health Service, which got mysteriously cut from the broadcast in the US, at a time when there was a bunch of fuss over Obamacare that had come into effect a year or two before.

      Was hard not to imagine that was a deliberate choice.

      • atoav5 hours ago
        Well the "no censorship!"-crowd in rhe US has been strangly focused on the censorship of racists, bigots and nazis. I don't think they consider censorship that benefits the Neo-feudalist lords as censorship.
      • riedel3 hours ago
        Even if a large conspiracy isn't involved, I believe that biases in worldview can contribute to these effects. However, I still think it's important to inform people of things they might be missing and hold media accountable for their choices, regardless of whether those choices are random or unknowingly biasedWe need to be careful not to fall into the allure of "fake media" in our outrage, as this could ultimately benefit populists in the long run.
      • dboreham6 hours ago
        Drug companies and insurers are big advertisers.
      • wtcactus5 hours ago
        So, due to US ideological propaganda, US media censored the part where the British do their ideological propaganda bit?

        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.

        • MattPalmer10862 hours ago
          The NHS is genuinely loved by most British people, for all it's faults. Not celebrating it would have been very weird. So not really propaganda, just showing the world the things we are proud of.

          Feel free to censor it on your end if you find the very idea dangerous.

        • whycombigator4 hours ago
          Every Brit has used the NHS multiple times.

          It's far from perfect but no propaganda is ever required, just direct experience.

          • wtcactus4 hours ago
            Every Brit has also used a Pub multiple times. Let’s nacionalize them and make them “free”.
        • piva004 hours ago
          What a weird worldview, celebrating censorship that aligns with corporate interests in healthcare, a basic necessity, while using the tired diatribe "but muh tax money!" to pathetically drum support for it, lol.

          Aren't you tired of being so angry at the wrong stuff? Such an exhausting way to live.

          • wtcactus3 hours ago
            Man, you really came commenting into an opinion piece by some "journalist" in a major news media outlet, denouncing that he didn't hear the "boos" loud enough, to tell the others that you think it's "an exhausting way to live" with the opposite opinion. Didn't you?
            • piva00an hour ago
              Nope, I came commenting on your comment which given the pattern of your other comments getting flagged all the time shows to be an exhausting way to live: being mad at small things.

              You just proved my point.

        • 4 hours ago
          undefined
        • giacomoforte4 hours ago
          The NHS is a bit like the NRA in the US. Politicians and rich folk would ideally do away with it, but they cannot, so they have to play lip service to gain favour with the public.

          So its not propaganda in the way you are thinking of.

    • rippeltippel6 hours ago
      > audiences will start assuming anything they do not show is being hidden

      Will they? Possibly a portion of them, but I doubt they'll be the majority.

  • runjake6 hours ago
    I’m a viewer in the USA and I heard the boos. They didn’t sound edited out. What did I do wrong?
    • seanmcdirmid6 hours ago
      You aren’t one of the few Americans who watched the opening ceremony on over the air NBC.
      • roryirvine3 hours ago
        You make it sound like NBC is some sort of obscure specialist service, but it turns out that they're actually a mainstream national broadcaster, available not just over the air but also on just about every satellite, cable, and streaming provider in the country: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBC

        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.

      • jb1991an hour ago
        Dude just about all Americans watch the Olympics on normal network TV, in this case NBC. What are you talking about?
    • CoolGuySteve4 hours ago
      I honestly think the way they mix their audio is so the stadium noise gets turned down whenever the announcer talks and the American announcers just never shut the fuck up no matter how inane they might be.
    • wtcactus5 hours ago
      [flagged]
  • orwinan hour ago
    I'll have to ask my brother but that might be NBC's audio engineer decision, or even his default settings (depending on the broadcaster voice).

    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)

    • inemesitaffiaan hour ago
      Someone in the US says they heard it. Another watching Eurosport said they didn't.

      Who to believe?

      • m00nsome33 minutes ago
        Germany here - I also could not hear it. I was wandering though that there was no reaction from the crowd. So that explains it.
  • CrzyLngPwd5 hours ago
    How very DPRK of them.
    • tkel2 hours ago
      very American thing happens in America - "Wow, this is like those other bad countries!"
  • wolfi16 hours ago
    my question is more technical: how did the blot out the booing? and: how live was it in the US? from the Academy Awards we know that they have a 5s delay (following the Michael Moore incident), but what is it with olympics broadcast?
    • ralph844 hours ago
      The audio engineers are monitoring multiple mics (for an event of this magnitude probably dozens) and increasing or decreasing volume on them in real time for the mix that goes on the air. Standard for any sports broadcast.
    • sparrc5 hours ago
      While they do show it live, it's in the middle of the workday, so almost everyone in the USA will have watched it delayed by many hours at "prime time", aka around 8pm local time in each zone.

      That being said, I'm in the US and I heard boos on the delayed broadcast.

      • wolfi15 hours ago
        as I unterstand the boos were blotted out only on the NBC broadcast, did you watch it on NBC?
      • agjmills4 hours ago
        Oddly I watched it live on the Eurosport broadcast and didn’t hear any noticeable booing
    • kkarpkkarp5 hours ago
      Just checked what Moore has done and found that quote of him (about Bush):

      > “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...

      • wolfi15 hours ago
        it was his Oscar for Bowling for Columbine
  • RedShift16 hours ago
    These american news companies are so goddamn spineless.
    • nielsbot6 hours ago
      money is on the line
      • general14654 hours ago
        Short term gain for long term loss
        • fuzzfactor4 hours ago
          Short term gain of money in exchange for for short term loss of democracy.
  • MaxPock6 hours ago
    Looks like Americans are adopting Chinese censorship methods. You won't see it thus it never happened.
    • padjo6 hours ago
      This website is one of the biggest culprits
      • whilenot-dev5 hours ago
        Care to elaborate?

        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://hn.algolia.com/

        [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/lists

        • padjo5 hours ago
          This thread will immediately disappear off the front page once some Americans wake up.
        • atoav4 hours ago
          There we go, it is flagged.
          • beardyw4 hours ago
            People flag stuff. I don't think it results in removal automatically though it probably downgrades it as a story.

            Some may regard this as off topic, but censorship seems to be a recurring subject and regularly discussed.

            • watwut3 hours ago
              Yes. When it is complaint about some leftist student protesting and thus interfering with far right speaker free speech rigth to never be opposed, regualarly discussed. Rarely flagged.

              But, when there is something making current admin or far right lool bad, flagged quickly

          • whilenot-dev3 hours ago
            ...so what? "Most stories about politics" are considered Off-Topic, as per the guidelines[0], and some members favor the flag- over the hide-button more than I'd like. It's still on place 19 on the active list[1], and a far cry from any practiced censorship like on Reddit, where stuff just gets [deleted] out of existence.

            [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

            [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/active

      • blurbleblurble5 hours ago
        No kidding
    • pstuart6 hours ago
      And Stalinist tactics in removing and erasing memorials and documents that contains subjects they don't like, e.g.,

        * 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/
      
      And so on...
    • whateveracct5 hours ago
      trumpism
    • huijzer5 hours ago
      So North Korea, China, America, Russia and basically all other countries have propaganda, and Europe doesn’t? I live in Europe and think we do. Not everything that is in the news is true.
      • smcl5 hours ago
        Europe doesn’t bill itself as “the land of the free” and doesn’t proudly tout itself as having free speech above all else no matter the cost. So famously fascist symbols - like the swastika/hakenkreuz among other things - are banned a few places, it may be controversial but it’s not a dirty little secret or anything like that
        • huijzer5 hours ago
          Updated comment to make argument clearer
          • smcl3 hours ago
            Your argument is no clearer. Someone's claiming US is beginning to resemble China in that they hide criticism of the ruling parties - they have not mentioned Europe once and you're saying ... something about censorship in Europe?

            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.

      • atoav5 hours ago
        "Your head is on fire!"

        "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.

  • zkmon5 hours ago
    Some USA (and western) viewers even believe that Putin can't speak, because they never saw him speaking.
    • whycombigator4 hours ago
      Organic lie generating machine not given airtime shocker...
      • zkmon3 hours ago
        If you are expecting leaders of countries and media to be truth-telling machines, sure, you are in shocker. Stay tuned to your truth machines.
    • wewxjfq4 hours ago
      Weird, I remember Western media ran full transcripts of his speech after the Ukraine invasion and every other time he crawled out of his bunker in the Urals. Would you like to enlighten us which important viewpoints of Putin get censored in the West?
  • cadamsdotcom5 hours ago
    Citation needed.. really sorry to say it because there are plenty of things to say about the current US administration.

    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.

    • 4 hours ago
      undefined
  • sizzleflip50005 hours ago
    People in the US heard the boos, as evidenced by the comments and others posting about it. All politicians get booed. But how many? And who controls the mics? The editing? The news press?

    More anti-American propaganda on HN. Why does this keep happening? This is not news, nor is it relevant for HN.

    • watwut3 hours ago
      It is unusual to be booed at olympic.
    • atoav5 hours ago
      Hackers care about the truth. I don't think many here would consider the censorship of a US head of state being inherently pro-US (or the criticism of said censorship to be anti-US).

      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.

      • sizzleflip50004 hours ago
        Americans - and citizens of all big countries - know their leadership isn't popular everywhere, especially when other governments disagree with them on increasingly more issues (UK and French censorship of speech being one of them, ironically).

        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.