[ SECRET POST #3003 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #3003 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.


__________________________________________________



17.


__________________________________________________



18.


__________________________________________________



19.


__________________________________________________



20.










Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 043 secrets from Secret Submission Post #429.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[dancing_clown]

I'm a journalist, too. Things can be censored and banned all the times by groups without being an infringement on free speech.

When I elect not to say things because I don't want to deal with the backlash, it's self-censorship. When my newspaper elects not to publish the name of rape victims, it's still a censoring of those names. When my office forbids the microwaving of popcorn, the popcorn has been banned.

Whether any of that applies to this cover is debatable (but it probably doesn't), but acting like the words censor(ship) and ban only apply to freedom of speech issues is just entirely inaccurate.

[dethtoll]

You're playing a semantics game on me when you know damn well that's not what I meant.

[dancing_clown]

And you're doing the same thing to the OP.

[dethtoll]

I made some (IMO reasonable) assumptions about the OP. That's a semantics game, how?

[dancing_clown]

Your kvetching over "banned" and "censorship" when you know full well what OP means is the semantics game that you've been playing.

[dethtoll]

I do know what OP means, why do you think I'm talking about this?

[dancing_clown]

Because you have a superiority complex and want the whole comm to know that you know OP was taking license with a word?

[dethtoll]

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

[(Anonymous)]

I like seeing people like you have the patience to plod though dt's dodging and evasion. Makes me think happy thoughts about a world full of people not going at the rest of the world like dethtoll.

TL;DR you do good work. feel good about yourself.

[blitzwing]

You literally said "'free speech' and 'censorship' only apply in relation to governmental authority", which is a totally incorrect statement. It's not "playing a semantics game" to point out that you're incorrect.

For some reason, you chose to add in an incorrect and irrelevant statement, and the falsity of that statement was pointed out.

[dethtoll]

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Private entities and private spaces aren't required to protect free speech. It's not censorship if someone tells you to shut up.

[blitzwing]

Private entities and private spaces aren't required to protect free speech.

Yep. And that means they can't censor how?

(frozen comment)

[dethtoll]

It's not censorship if someone tells you to shut up.

So shut up.

(frozen comment)

[blitzwing]

It's not censorship if someone tells you to shut up.

And if you choose to shut up, it's self-censorship. I really feel like you're starting to make progress on understanding what censorship actually means.

(frozen comment)

[dethtoll]

Why don't you go make progress on shutting up?

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

Are you autistic or something? Honest question.

[cbrachyrhynchos]

You literally said "'free speech' and 'censorship' only apply in relation to governmental authority", which is a totally incorrect statement. It's not "playing a semantics game" to point out that you're incorrect.

It only works if the person is actually incorrect. Can you point to a legal framework that compels DC to print every piece of art they commission?

[blitzwing]

Can you point to a legal framework that compels DC to print every piece of art they commission?

How is the meaning of the word censorship in any way dependent on the existence of " legal framework that compels DC to print every piece of art they commission"?

[cbrachyrhynchos]

In the absence of such a framework, publishers are free to set their own editorial policies and decisions, including the decision not to distribute a work.

[blitzwing]

Yes, and they can still censor.

[cbrachyrhynchos]

Comparing routine editorial decisions to, for example, South Africa's ban on "V" in the 1980s because the aliens were reptilian and the president's nickname was "crocodile" betrays a profound misunderstanding of what censorship is.

Oh no! I'm a censor, I refused to print a sentence lacking a serial comma!

[(Anonymous)]

Seriously. He's a fucking journalist. I literally cannot get over that.

[dethtoll]

Went to school for it and everything!

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah I took organic chemistry when I went to school but it doesn't make me an organic chemist.

If someone is unemployed it doesn't make them a journalist.

[(Anonymous)]

How do you know he's unemployed?