5 ms·

Do you think it’s possible that the US government has enough control over public opinion/attention that they simply don’t need to explicitly censor in most case

by baddox 7y ago

Do you think it’s possible that the US government has enough control over public opinion/attention that they simply don’t need to explicitly censor in most cases? Who remembers PRISM? Did the government censor it? Or did we just conveniently forget?

CountSessine 7y ago
Sorry; again, no equivalence.
Thorrez 7y ago
I still see discussion of PRISM on HN. And of course if anyone forgets details, they can check the Wikipedia page. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=prism&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
alasdair_ 7y ago
Anyone who would like to learn more about PRISM is welcome to search for it or look at (for example) the wikipedia page. Now, if someone in China would like to learn more about the massacre in Tiananmen Square, would they be easily able to visit (say) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Tiananmen_Square_protests https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Tiananmen_Square_protes... to read more about it?
- baddox 7y ago
  Of course, that’s precisely my point. You can easily read about PRISM, and yet the government wasn’t held responsible and presumably didn’t change its actions, so it appears that censorship simply wasn’t necessary.
SmirkingRevenge 7y ago
> Do you think it’s possible that the US government has enough control over public opinion/attention that they simply don’t need to explicitly censor in most cases? No, not at all, and they absolutely do not. > Who remembers PRISM? Did the government censor it? Or did we just conveniently forget? I do, but sure, many don't. But that's mostly evidence that the market for grievances against the government is a competitive one, in the US (and the west in general) - you'll always be able to cherry pick some single issue (or several) that are serious, yet fall below the radar of the general populace. In the west, we can curse our leader's names all day long, publicly with a megaphone. In the east, you can't mention Winnie the Pooh.

by baddox 7y ago

CountSessine 7y ago

Sorry; again, no equivalence.

Thorrez 7y ago

I still see discussion of PRISM on HN. And of course if anyone forgets details, they can check the Wikipedia page. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=prism&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

alasdair_ 7y ago

Anyone who would like to learn more about PRISM is welcome to search for it or look at (for example) the wikipedia page. Now, if someone in China would like to learn more about the massacre in Tiananmen Square, would they be easily able to visit (say) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Tiananmen_Square_protests https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Tiananmen_Square_protes... to read more about it?

baddox 7y ago
Of course, that’s precisely my point. You can easily read about PRISM, and yet the government wasn’t held responsible and presumably didn’t change its actions, so it appears that censorship simply wasn’t necessary.

SmirkingRevenge 7y ago

> Do you think it’s possible that the US government has enough control over public opinion/attention that they simply don’t need to explicitly censor in most cases? No, not at all, and they absolutely do not. > Who remembers PRISM? Did the government censor it? Or did we just conveniently forget? I do, but sure, many don't. But that's mostly evidence that the market for grievances against the government is a competitive one, in the US (and the west in general) - you'll always be able to cherry pick some single issue (or several) that are serious, yet fall below the radar of the general populace. In the west, we can curse our leader's names all day long, publicly with a megaphone. In the east, you can't mention Winnie the Pooh.