Topic: Is it not for trying to hide the truth? (Read 1168 times)
If corporations were so effective, then Wikileaks would be flourishing, but it isn't.
In fact corporations are trying everything to stop Wikileaks. What incentive is there for a corporation to publish information that will diminish their profits?
Groups like wikileaks are essential. The only community wide justification for censorship is during war, and only of important military information. And this information should be time-released anyway.
Capitalism and media are not in the best interests of the community. Corporations power over the media is disgusting and needs to be overhauled.
Capitalism and media are not in the best interests of the community. Corporations power over the media is disgusting and needs to be overhauled.
By, let me guess. . .government oversight?
LOL
Absolutely. There should be restrictions on owning media outlets that prevent them from getting bought up by massive corporations that can then make their own news to fit their agenda.
Groups like wikileaks are essential. The only community wide justification for censorship is during war, and only of important military information. And this information should be time-released anyway.
Capitalism and media are not in the best interests of the community. Corporations power over the media is disgusting and needs to be overhauled.
Capitalism and media are not in the best interests of the community. Corporations power over the media is disgusting and needs to be overhauled.
By, let me guess. . .government oversight?
LOL
No. The best way to fight against capitalism is through a free market.
So what of anarcho-capitalists, who want a free market?
Groups like wikileaks are essential. The only community wide justification for censorship is during war, and only of important military information. And this information should be time-released anyway.
Capitalism and media are not in the best interests of the community. Corporations power over the media is disgusting and needs to be overhauled.
Capitalism and media are not in the best interests of the community. Corporations power over the media is disgusting and needs to be overhauled.
By, let me guess. . .government oversight?
LOL
No. The best way to fight against capitalism is through a free market.
Groups like wikileaks are essential. The only community wide justification for censorship is during war, and only of important military information. And this information should be time-released anyway.
Capitalism and media are not in the best interests of the community. Corporations power over the media is disgusting and needs to be overhauled.
Capitalism and media are not in the best interests of the community. Corporations power over the media is disgusting and needs to be overhauled.
By, let me guess. . .government oversight?
LOL
Groups like wikileaks are essential. The only community wide justification for censorship is during war, and only of important military information. And this information should be time-released anyway.
Capitalism and media are not in the best interests of the community. Corporations power over the media is disgusting and needs to be overhauled.
Capitalism and media are not in the best interests of the community. Corporations power over the media is disgusting and needs to be overhauled.
Consider the following examples:
Concerned mothers wanting to suppress violence in videogames for everyone, in the name of 'protecting children'.
People wanting to prevent mocking of their religion.
Celebrities or rich people wanting to prevent parody or offensive jokes being made about them.
Corporations wishing to censor harmful facts about them, which might result in reduced sales/share price/law suits.
People wanting to censor books with sexual content or references to drugs.
If we consider politicians as aiming in general to represent the people. A lot of censorship could be viewed as a government employees trying to satisfy it's own voters, rather then benefit themselves directly.
Concerned mothers wanting to suppress violence in videogames for everyone, in the name of 'protecting children'.
People wanting to prevent mocking of their religion.
Celebrities or rich people wanting to prevent parody or offensive jokes being made about them.
Corporations wishing to censor harmful facts about them, which might result in reduced sales/share price/law suits.
People wanting to censor books with sexual content or references to drugs.
If we consider politicians as aiming in general to represent the people. A lot of censorship could be viewed as a government employees trying to satisfy it's own voters, rather then benefit themselves directly.
Do those peeps over in those troubled areas have any idea how bad it looks for them to try to get in the way of free press?
Is there an incentive for doing this? If so who would benefit from it? If you have answers to those questions then, have faith that you are right and check it by looking into history. Just like the lawyers draw from cases of the past, look and search history and see if you this has happened in the past and how it turned out. These things such as limiting the press have happened before and we have the Constitution written specifically for it. That alone should let you know the dangers of abuse in that regard.
Stupidity.
Dictatorships tell people exactly what to do and believe. This tends to create rebellion and discontent.
Democracies like the US allow people to have "freedom" of expression within a tiny box with preset bounds. This avoids the discontent and rebellion because people think they're free, but it also makes sure no one veers too far from the party line.
"Those who manipulate the unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. In almost every act of our lives whether in the sphere of politics or business in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires that control the public mind." - Edward Bernays
Dictatorships tell people exactly what to do and believe. This tends to create rebellion and discontent.
Democracies like the US allow people to have "freedom" of expression within a tiny box with preset bounds. This avoids the discontent and rebellion because people think they're free, but it also makes sure no one veers too far from the party line.
"Those who manipulate the unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. In almost every act of our lives whether in the sphere of politics or business in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires that control the public mind." - Edward Bernays
Bad news makes are troops get their feelings hurt and not want to Defend America(TM) as awesomely as they could otherwise.
In the countries the governments are restricting, or even outright banning free press, do you expect them to have any real reason for doing that that doesn't involve trying to hide or distort the truth in their favor?
Jump to: