SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Libertarian Discussion Forum
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Neocon who wrote (2719)5/12/1999 1:09:00 AM
From: MeDroogies  Read Replies (1) of 13056
 
If the music stops playing because it was keeping people up, and enough of them complained, then it was an invasion of their right to privacy and not censorship.
If hate speech is offensive to the listeners of a station, and enough threaten to stop listening, then they are acting on their right to choose, and the station (wanting to keep listeners) is not censoring, but making a relatively simple economic choice. If he is more concerned about making a stand for totally free speech, he may offset less revenues with a "good feeling" of having supported free speech.
Howard Stern is a perfect example of this. Stations tried to use economics to keep him off the air, but then ratings translated into revenues. Then NBC forced him off because they didn't like his behavior. They wound up selling a piece of crap station off, one that had been dominant 3 years earlier. Making economic choices isn't the same as censorship, and offers different payoffs.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News