Australia took the radical step in banning social media for users less than 16 years old.
I can see the intent behind the law. When the internet was nascent we learned about the "stranger danger" creeping around every corner. Individuals can, and did, reach out to do young people harm. But now the danger is coming from the people who created the websites, not the people who use them.
Chairman Jordan, ranking member Plaskett, members of the Select Committee,
Okay, I had my fun with my last essay about censorship. But this one is serious. I am contemplating this question. When, if ever, is censorship appropriate?
For the following examples, I'm using a 3-tiered answer:
I am writing here to confess my sins. Yesterday, I partially agreed with the author of an essay about censorship. My heresy was righteously called out by other c99 members and I have seen the light. You have my abject apology for daring to suggest that banning Our President from Twitter was a good thing.
and maybe we will not notice how you are telling us what to think and why.
1:29 - 2:13
"I have a question for the audience. When I said Comey was fired by Trump, y'all cheered, Why?"
[video:https://youtu.be/iYZbtTGVmhE?t=87]
Censoring the audience's original opinion.
audience in background 1-9 sec, dead silence in the background 10-30 sec, audience in background 31 sec to end
This morning I discovered something amazing at The Willamette Weekly, a lefty alt free publication here in Portland. I was censored by WW for commenting on a white nationalist march for "free speech". There is irony all over the place in this one.
Recently, there's been a torrent of videos on Youtube of people talking about, and heavily criticizing, Google's decision to demonitize (take away advertisement based funding) any and all videos that are, to name a few categories, "controversial, include swearing, show violence, contain partial nudity," among others. The immediate reaction was that people believed Google was engaging in censorship of some form.
