censorship

Commentary on Aaron Ross Powell’s essay

This entry was posted in Writing and tagged censorship ethics on by

The essay “Surround Yourself With Those Who Are Admirable, and Distance Yourself From Those Who Aren’t,” by Aaron Ross Powell, has me feeling ambivalent. Each time he links to it on Bluesky (and he’s linked to it a lot), I want to say something, but I couldn’t put my concern in a few words. It isn’t obviously wrong, but its focus could encourage readers to cut themselves off from all who disagree with them. In general, I should add, his newsletter is definitely worth reading, and even this piece helped me to clarify my thinking.
(more…)

When bookstores refuse to sell books

This entry was posted in Commentary News and tagged books bookstores censorship Rowling on by

A San Francisco bookstore called the Booksmith (I think it’s unrelated to the old Paperback Booksmith chain) has stopped selling J. K. Rowling’s books because of the causes she supports. It’s unclear whether they’ll decline orders for the books or have just stopped stocking them. It won’t surprise anyone that the controversy has gotten ugly.
(more…)

Bad news for free speech in Bow, NH

This entry was posted in Censorship Commentary News and tagged censorship law New Hampshire on by

This has been a bad year for freedom of expression in the United States. ICE thugs have hauled people away without charges for expressing views that the government doesn’t like. In New Hampshire, a federal judge has delivered an outrageous decision regarding a protest in Bow, New Hampshire.

The ruling by Judge Steven McAuliffe is full of absurdities and disregard for the First Amendment. The basic argument is that school athletic events are a limited public forum, and the schools retain some control over types of expression at them. This is true, but it doesn’t mean they can arbitrarily decide what people can say or can’t. The restrictions have to serve a legitimate purpose and be viewpoint-neutral, and they have to be enforced evenly.
(more…)

ICE: America’s Gestapo

This entry was posted in Censorship Commentary and tagged censorship ICE liberty on by

“Geheime Staatspolizei” means “secret state police,” usually shortened to “Gestapo.” It was the Nazis’ enforcement bureau, the ones who snatched people without charges and sent them away to prisons or execution. In the United States, it’s shortened to “ICE.” Its masked thugs have snatched people off the street, not presenting any criminal charges, and shipped them to offshore hellholes. So far I haven’t heard of its intentionally killing anyone, though people have died in its custody.
(more…)

Censoring networks by intimidation 1

This entry was posted in Censorship Commentary and tagged censorship Trump on by

Hardly a day goes by that Donald Trump doesn’t commit an impeachable offense. Among them is his attempt to intimidate broadcast networks into making their coverage of him more favorable and his opponents less favorable. He has filed a nonsense lawsuit against CBS, claiming that editing a Kamala Harris interview in a way he didn’t like constituted election interference. All the analysis I’ve read says the suit doesn’t stand a chance on its merits, but the government has the power to approve or block a merger CBS is seeking, and the implied threat to disallow it has CBS ready to fold. The FCC, under Trump appointee Brendan Carr, is also applying pressure. NPR says “CBS’ parent company appears to be inching toward capitulation, as its controlling owner wants to drag CBS out of the headlines and wrap up a corporate sale.”
(more…)

The speech police

This entry was posted in Censorship and tagged censorship freedom on by

Several states have set up hotlines where people can report legal, constitutionally protected speech to the government. There is no indication — so far — that people are being prosecuted for exercising their First Amendment rights, but a call from the cops saying you’ve been named in a “hate incident” is intimidating enough.

In Oregon, someone contacted a hotline run by the Oregon Department of Justice and reported a neighbor for having an Israeli flag on his door. The hotline operator treated the bigot’s complaint as a report of a valid “bias incident” and the bigot as a “victim.” The operator said the caller could get rewarded with money from the state’s Crime Victim Compensation Program, even though there was no crime.
(more…)

What does the TikTok ban mean?

This entry was posted in Censorship and tagged censorship China Internet TikTok on by

Biden signed a bill banning access to an Internet service. The Supreme Court has upheld the ban, ruling in effect that claiming “national security” overrides the First Amendment. What happens next isn’t clear, but the sloppy news reports I’ve seen indicate that it could be worse than I thought. The law doesn’t do much directly to ByteDance, which is a foreign company. It’s really a ban on what businesses in the USA can do.

CNN’s report is typically sloppy and alarming in what it suggests.
(more…)

The “Paradox of Tolerance” swindle 1

This entry was posted in Censorship Commentary and tagged censorship liberty philosophy on by

“Paradox of Tolerance” is a favorite slogan of censorship advocates. Most often they drop the words in a discussion without elaboration to give the impression they’ve said something profound. Some will mention its connection to Karl Popper. Few will cite his words, since they’re actually opposed to censorship.

The words in question are from a footnote in The Open Society and Its Enemies. The footnote is a bit unclear; Popper was adding a passing thought, not a polished commentary. Here are the words:
(more…)

Marvel abets Chinese censorship

This entry was posted in Commentary and tagged censorship China Disney Marvel MCU on by

The ruler of the world’s second most powerful country feels so insecure that he has to ban mentions of Winnie the Pooh because some people think there’s a resemblance. It would be laughable except for the real-world consequences. I’m sure none of the panels at the Chengdu Worldcon discussed Milne’s character. You also aren’t allowed to discuss it in an online game called Marvel Rivals. The use of a long list of words and phrases is flagged as inappropriate in game chat. Among the phrases Marvel won’t let you use are “Winnie the Pooh,” “Pooh,” “Tiananmen,” “1989,” and “Free Taiwan.” Ironically, Disney, which owns Marvel, also owns the animated version of Winnie the Pooh. So Disney has acquiesced in censoring the mention of its own property.
(more…)