Interesting People mailing list archives
IP: RE: interview censored by U.S. State Dept., published in the UK
From: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 13:09:32 -0400
Was not my word, but ...
From: "Tony Mayo" <tm () hiddenfootprints com> To: <farber () cis upenn edu> Subject: RE: interview censored by U.S. State Dept., published in the UK Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 12:42:48 -0400 Please be more precise in the use of the incendiary word "censored." If the US government had tried to stop the Washington Post from running the interview we could be worried about losing our freedoms, but that is not what happened. When the government uses threats of force to stop a private entity from publishing something, that's censorship. When a government agency declines to use its resources to promulgate something inconsistent with its aims, that's judgment. Virtually nothing except child pornography is censored in the US. Best wishes, Tony Mayo
For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/
Current thread:
- IP: RE: interview censored by U.S. State Dept., published in the UK David Farber (Sep 26)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- IP: RE: interview censored by U.S. State Dept., published in the UK David Farber (Sep 26)
- IP: RE: interview censored by U.S. State Dept., published in the UK David Farber (Sep 26)