Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: chevydude26

This is not censorship and neither was it censorship when MediaMatters convinced some not to advertise on Rush. IIRC, only governments can engage in censorship.

It’s business and the perception of the public.


7 posted on 05/08/2012 10:56:07 AM PDT by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alterations - The acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Cletus.D.Yokel

Boycotts and embargos are private actions implicitly authorized, even encouraged by the 1st, 9th, 10th amendments.


8 posted on 05/08/2012 11:17:01 AM PDT by jimfree (In Nov 2012 my 11 y/o granddaughter will have more relevant executive experience than Barack Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel

A city council in California tried to extend the Media Matters “boycott” to prohibiting stations in the community from broadcasting such programming. Additionally, there were calls to the FCC to ban Rush so there were attempts in censorship in that case.

Government restriction of speech is censorship. And it was politically based, not because of the word “slut” being used.


12 posted on 05/08/2012 11:54:38 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (Barack Obama has cut and run from what he called "the right war".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson