3 ms·
Try looking it up first.
by chris_wot 11y ago
Try looking it up first.
- MustardTiger 11y agoI did. Now please explain what you mean. Acting as though anyone who can not read your mind is some sort of mentally defective reject not worth bothering with is in rather poor taste.
- chris_wot 11y agoI would, but your response is so aggressive I think I'll pass this time.
- MustardTiger 11y agoIf you would, then you would have. You didn't the first time I asked, or the second, why pretend you would the third time?
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- dang 11y agoPlease stop. Comments here need to be civil and substantive, and yours are crossing both lines.
- dang 11y agoPlease don't perpetuate spats.
- chris_wot 11y agoSorry. It's just that a Google search would have taken him to this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_Overboard_affair https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children_Overboard_affair Which was a release of wrong information that demonised refugees for supposedly throwing their children into the water to blackmail the Howard government into letting them into Australia. This was released by Peter Reith, but it was subsequently revealed it was nothing of the sort, but it helped create a moral panic that boosted the electoral prospects of the Howard government, who subsequently won. It wasn't checked carefully by media organizations who ran the story - so it indeed got out of hand. Which answered his question.
- MustardTiger 11y agoA google search did take me to that, which doesn't answer my question at all. A false story is not a story getting out of hand. It is a false story. And it doesn't address the main question of "how out of hand does a story need to be to make censorship good?".
- dang 11y agoReally, please stop, both of you.
- popmystack 11y agoI don't think you know what the word censorship means.