Re: No free speech for Glenn Sacks
- From: Andrew Usher <k_over_hbarc@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 06:36:38 -0700 (PDT)
Society wrote:
So what?
"Free speech" is a political concept and has to do with
_state_ censorship and prior restraint of the expression
of political opinions in public spaces.
This is not true. It may be how you define 'free speech', but I refuse
to accept the libertarian definition in this or anything else. The
simplest and most useful definition is the ability to get one's
message to one's intended audience, regardless of the medium that must
be used.
And one could argue that the entire Internet is a 'public space'.
Glenn Sacks' blog is private. Mr. Sacks has no obligation
to give you (or anyone else) a soap box on _his_ private site.
I supposed he doesn't _have to_, but he _ought to_ in this case; and
it's certainly my right to complain if he doesn't.
Consumer tip: griping over here at soc.men (or Usenet generally)
that you can't post whatever you want on someone's private
web site makes you look petty.
Well, I shouldn't have to keep silent about it. That's the point of
the Internet, isn't it, that it prevents private dictators from
shutting down speech?
Andrew Usher
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: No free speech for Glenn Sacks
- From: Heidi Graw
- Re: No free speech for Glenn Sacks
- References:
- No free speech for Glenn Sacks
- From: Andrew Usher
- Re: No free speech for Glenn Sacks
- From: Society
- No free speech for Glenn Sacks
- Prev by Date: Re: Women's refuge closed by 'politically correct' council as it does not cater for abused men
- Next by Date: Re: No free speech for Glenn Sacks
- Previous by thread: Re: No free speech for Glenn Sacks
- Next by thread: Re: No free speech for Glenn Sacks
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|