Subject:
|
Re: What Censorship Isn't
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 13 Apr 2007 21:11:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3680 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
Nope. The child and parents can still read the book at the local library or
at the bookstore or even online. The private school is choosing not to carry
a particular book on private property, which isn’t censorship.
|
So, you’re arguing that censorship can only be effected by a government, or
illegally? By illegally, I’m suggesting that a private citizen/organization
violates an agreement such as public free speech or their own TOS.
Essentially, I think you’re suggesting that if you actively AGREE to being
“censored”, then it’s not “censorship”. But if you NEVER actively agreed, ONLY
then can it be censorship. Well... I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree!
| |
Suppose I write a book that is lousy by every objective standard, and I pitch
it to Random House. Are they censoring me because they choose not to publish
it?
|
I’d say technically yes, but I might not call it that depending on the
particulars, mostly having to do with the severity of your desire, the reason
for their denial, and the ferver with which you tried to get it published.
| |
If it’s obscured to the point of being made effectively inaccessible, then
you may be correct.
|
At least we agree on something!
| |
What you’re arguing, in effect, is that anything short of a fullscale
free-for-all is censorship.
|
Yes. Ish. What I’m actually saying is that any denial of information of any kind
by anyone is arguably debatable as censorship. The particulars of whether I
personally would call it “censorship” relate to several other factors. Sort of
like the difference between “self-confidence” and “conceit”. A certain level of
“self-confidence” results in me calling someone “conceited”, and similarly a
certain level of denial results in me calling something “censorship”. What that
level is and how it’s determined is up for discussion (as far as I’m concerned),
but anything where denial of information is happening I would construe as
possibly censorship.
DaveE
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: What Censorship Isn't
|
| (...) Nope. The child and parents can still read the book at the local library or at the bookstore or even online. The private school is choosing not to carry a particular book on private property, which isn't censorship. Suppose I write a book that (...) (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
|
|
|
|
