my understanding is anything that people might get offended like.. racist, sexist comments..
or what is YOUR understanding of offensive language?
and the target is censoring it from everyone in general, just to be fair (i'm not for or against it atm, still chewing on it..)
i think it's to do with ethics.. but then by censoring language that could be offensive could potentially be more offensive to the person that was going to be offended? if that makes any sense?
i dunno.. this could be a discussion type thing? but then we're going to need evidence to back it up rather than just drawing out of thin air.
also, not completely unrelating but following on the politically correct thread, when they tried banning christmas coz it could offend other religions, the "other religions" got offended coz they didn't take offense from christmas.
then they tried to change "baa baa black sheep" to "baa baa happy sheep", i think people woul get even more offended that they even thought of the link!!
2007-11-28
01:26:21
·
8 answers
·
asked by
Harold s
2
in
Politics & Government
➔ Law & Ethics
When you say censorship, it is important to clarify what that means. The constitution gives us the right to free speech protecting us from government imposed censorship. Where there is no state involvement, the constitution is not implicated. Nonetheless, it is important to discuss the role of censorship in the private sector.
Universities often adopt a politically correct speech policy. This is unfortunate for several reasons. First, our universities should be forums for open speech. If we stifle free thought on a university campus, there are certainly worthwhile ideas that may be suppressed. More importantly, stifling speech does not stifle thought. I would rather know who those individuals are that possess hateful thoughts than have that speech suppressed and never know who they are. The same is true in online forums and other areas of open discourse.
There are legitimate concerns regarding offensive speech in the workplace and other areas. People should not have to be subjected to racist, sexist or other offensive speech in order to earn a living. There are laws protecting us from this and, although enforcement is difficult and far from perfect, a harassment free workplace is a noble ambition.
Of course there is much more that can be said on the subject. I am just trying to touch on a few of the key areas here and frame the discussion.
2007-11-28 02:09:06
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
the ban on language on tv and radio is based on the theory that broadcasters' have been given a governmental right to enter your home and thus to protect your family. (see FCC v. Pacifica) it has nothing to do with banning language in any other medium including the internet. and there are limits to language, the most commonly used one is yelling fire in a movie theater. there are a number of legal limits to freedom of speech such as the above e.g., incitement, or defamation, or false and misleading advertisement, etc. however, passing laws that limit speech based on nothing other than the fact that it is offensive would never pass muster under our constitutional system and would be struck down every time
2007-11-28 12:35:34
·
answer #2
·
answered by qb 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
I think people should be not be so offended. And we should not censor anything. This is supposed to be a free country... in thought, speech, print, etc. If people don't like what they see/hear, then they should leave the situation that offends them and be quiet about it, respecting the rights of others.
2007-11-28 09:30:10
·
answer #3
·
answered by steve g 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
YAHOO is aware that some people are abusing the system and YAHOO doesn't care. If you complain about a YAHOO Customer Representative they suspend your account but the accounts of those people who violate TOS on a daily basis continue open. I also posted some questions regarding this issue.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AhIjO13WZ9YAl16FlS2ZY2DW7BR.;_ylv=3?qid=20071128062143AA4Dbgy
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ap4q.kbIVZjkpXyL2MZfiODsy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071128055633AAnxGdD
PS and this is the "Automatic response" that I received. YAHOO is aware and is going to investigate? Never did.
"This is an auto-generated response designed to let you know that we
have
received your report, which will be investigated by an Abuse Specialist
within approximately two business days. We appreciate and value the
reports that we receive from customers like you.
Please be assured we investigate reports of possible violations of the
Yahoo! Terms of Service (TOS) and take appropriate action as determined
by Yahoo! under our TOS or other applicable Terms or Guidelines.
You will not receive another message from us unless we need to request
more information from you to further our investigation."
For more information regarding the Yahoo! Terms of Service, please
visit:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
2007-11-28 09:38:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
"Offensive" languages is bared from broadcast of radio and TV and in the 1950's people in the US were jailed for using it in nightclubs, because it is, well. offensive to most people and not considered protected by the first amendment. Generally you can express your ideas but watch what words you use if you do not want to get deleted. Here is article on the law and censorship on the Internet.
http://www.legalzoom.com/legal-articles/obscenity-regulated-internet.html
2007-11-28 10:18:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by meg 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
PC was created to ATTACK free speech under the guise of trying not to hurt others. The road to tyranny is paved with good intentions (paraphrasing her)
2007-11-28 09:29:51
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The constitution gives us all the right of free speech.
It does not give us the right to not be offended.
2007-11-28 09:36:08
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
In U.S., you can say whatever you want. Just make sure you stick to the facts because lies and generalizations are illegal (in the form of defamation, perjury, etc.).
2007-11-28 09:44:14
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋