[Vision2020] Disturbing trends

[Ted Moffett]

Tim, Carl and others:

Tim, your acceptance of "censorship" when it is done by private institutions 
or individuals is a bit too oversimplified and casual.  In fact you state:

>    Again, no governmental involvement--no censorship.

Why do you think only the government can engage in censorship?  If all the 
private newspapers and televised media outlets in the US block info from 
reaching the public, is this not a form of censorship?

Of course we have the legal right to boycott products or institutions or 
ignore people we do not like or agree with.  But what the law allows, and 
what is truly encouraging and respecting the democratic ideals of political 
speech that is open, are two different things.

It may be legal for me to deny to release a movie, if I own a movie studio, 
that features a movie star who expresses political views I find abhorrent.  
But is this action consistent with the ideals of democracy?  I would say it 
is not.  Especially if the movie does not promote the political views I 
disagree with.  These types of actions are an attempt to personally damage 
someone because you do not like what they believe in a situation where 
politics is not involved.  Carl Westberg's baseball controversy is this type 
of situation.

This is like firing your janitor if you own a business just because he voted 
for George Bush and you happen to be a die-hard Nader fan.  I think most 
people would agree there is something unfair and against the principles of 
American democracy in this sort of action.

If most people in American start harassing and denying economic 
opportunities to people who they happen to disagree with on political 
issues, it will have and probably does now have a chilling effect on speech.

There will be examples where these ideals are difficult to live up to, like 
the example given on vision2020 of the racist bumper stickers that a store 
owner would keep off his shelves.  However, in this case the bumper stickers 
and what they say are being targeted, not the person who made the bumper 
stickers.  If the person who made the bumper stickers was fired from his 
janitor job at the same store just because of his political views, which he 
did not express on the job, this would be a different ethical situation than 
keeping the racist bumper stickers off the shelves.

No ethical principle is perfect and covers all situations without examples 
that present unsolvable contradictions between competing ethical rules.

Ted


_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail