5 ms·
Is that a really short article? Or do you have to pay to read the whole story?
by joejohnson 15y ago
Is that a really short article? Or do you have to pay to read the whole story?
- w1ntermute 15y agoLooks like the Google-the-title trick doesn't work anymore unless you clear your cookies or use another browser. Anyway, the full text is at http://pastebin.com/hhJLD6bs http://pastebin.com/hhJLD6bs
- pavel_lishin 15y agoAnyone else find it amusing - or is it ironic? - that someone provided free access to an otherwise hidden article about censorship online?
- daeken 15y agoA private corporation restricting access to information isn't censorship. If it were an article that the government put behind a paywall, you might be able to construe it as such, but even then it seems silly since there's still no limit on the expression itself.
- pavel_lishin 15y agoSorry, I didn't mean to imply that the WSJ blocking access was censorship - I know they're fully within their rights, etc., etc. I just thought it was amusing.
- JoeCortopassi 15y agoI thought it was funny :-)
- william42 15y agoHowever, the Internet treats both as damage and routes around it.
- SoftwareMaven 15y agoThe government puts information behind paywalls all the time. It's called Confidential, Secret, and Top Secret.
- pavel_lishin 15y agoOther than that, FOIA request cost a token amount.
- joe_the_user 15y agoIndeed, Now if North Korea could only arrange to become one large company with its citizens relabeled employees, its laws relabeled "conditions of employment", and their prisons as "homeless camps" then no one could object. Those who are fired are welcome to go "anywhere in the country not owned by KimCo" - IE to any of ten detention areas. Yes, I think I've found the path to Freedom for the 'Democratic' North Koreans...
- gnosis 15y ago"A private corporation restricting access to information isn't censorship." Censorship is the suppression of speech or other public communication which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient to the general body of people as determined by a government, media outlet, or other controlling body. https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Censorship https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Censorship
- ryanhuff 15y agoUnfortunately, the quoted text was missing a key word. Rephrased here: "A private corporation restricting access to ITS OWN information isn't censorship."
- carussell 15y ago...none of which resembles WSJ's actions here... (And Wikipedia is hardly approaching authoritative. I'd suggest something like the OED, but given that it's another subscription service [for the online form], I guess it would fall under one of those skewed interpretations of censorship, too.)
- pavel_lishin 15y agoCool, a pedant party. Anyone bring chips?
- jonknee 15y agoGoogle-the-title worked for me. If it hadn't, a pretty good way to avoid having to use another browser or mess with cookies is to use porn mode (Chrome's incognito for me).
- ronnier 15y agohttp://viewtext.org/article?url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052748704889404576277391449002016.html%3Fmod%3DWSJASIA_hpp_MIDDLETopNews http://viewtext.org/article?url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%...
- bcaulf 15y agoAnother approach is to use Privoxy http://www.privoxy.org/ http://www.privoxy.org/ and add these lines to user.action: { +hide-referrer{http://news.google.com/news/} } .wsj.com