Linked by David Adams on Tue 13th Dec 2011 03:12 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 500114
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
No, that still wouldn't really make sense; the systems of censorship are often implemented by making, by pronouncing the censored artefacts to be illegal (also on case-by-case basis - say, specific books; the legal ones, those in official circulation, needing to be "cleared" in effect)
Essentially, it would be falling into that cherry picking mentioned by parent - because one can always eventually say "we don't have censorship, we just target illegal stuff" in such interpretation.




Member since:
2005-07-06
I *think* he is saying if it is illegal in the first place, then it isn't censorship. Censorship applies to limiting information that is legal, but objectionable to some.