Subject:
|
Re: What Censorship Isn't
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 13 Apr 2007 18:53:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3712 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Eaton wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Timothy P. Smith wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Timothy Gould wrote:
| |
Does that apply to pay-to-view television channels too? If they
purposefully leave out bits of news is it not censorship?
|
Every news show leaves out bits of news. Is all news censored?
Every library excludes some books. Is that censorship?
|
Censorship implies a bit more active restriction, I think.
|
Hey, that’s pretty good. In essence, omission is not censorship;
restriction is.
That works at least in the public arena, but it still doesn’t apply IMO to a
private forum.
Still, it’s a good rule of thumb.
Dave!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: What Censorship Isn't
|
| (...) Censorship implies a bit more active restriction, I think. Censorship of the news would be when a party involved in delivering the news attempts to delivery a particular piece of news but is denied by their editor, manager, network, the FCC, (...) (17 years ago, 13-Apr-07, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
25 Messages in This Thread:
   
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
