WashingTone Locian Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Vince(1) Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > >
> > > You may agree with the Gayssot Act in
> > principle,
> > > but it is still technically
> > government-sanctioned
> > > censorship...
> > >
> > >
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gayssot_Act
> >
> > I agree...but we dont absolute freedoms in the
> > media here either. Our restrictions just seem
> to
> > be more sex based then religiously based.
>
> With the exception of the FCC's ridiculous
> censorship of broadcasting outlets over sex and
> profanity, most of those regulations are
> self-imposed by the cable, print and Internet news
> outlets themselves. As far as I know, the
> government can't stop CNN from reporting about
> stories that are sexual in nature or that defame
> religion if CNN chose to do it. They opt not to do
> it because advertisers would stop advertising. But
> that is not government censorship.
Federal regulators drove Howard Stern off commercial/public radio. Made us pay for the honor of listening to lesbians do it. After the Janet Jackson wardrobe incident many stations were fined for behavior that previous to that incident would have gone unnoticed. I hope and pray the FCC starts to enforce the fairness doctrine to the radio waves. Those are all very powerful censorship powers of the US Govt. I am sure Europew and the rest of the world also has access to cable shows that bypass their Government's scrutiny just like we do. Plus Europeans in general are much more apt to get out into the streets and demonstrate when their govt.'s atempt to change some rule. Meanwhile such behavior here is riduculed as extreme..and how dare they delay rush hour! So..you havent convinced me yet on the speech issue.