Money for *CENSORED* (political correctness gone mad?)

[Silvermink]

Not having media able to preach religion to you
Removal of Propaganda
Removal of Hate speech
Prevention of inciting riots
Libel

Not everyone agrees with everything on this list being "good". I'm on the fence about the "hate speech" thing, myself - the line between free speech and inciting violence can be fuzzy. I wouldn't like it if some guy got on TV and called me a disease-spreading bisexual degenerate, but equally, would I be okay with a restriction on my ability to call him a hatemongering fundie wingnut?

Anyway, not trying to start a big debate. I just don't think you can assume that everything on that list is an unquestionable good.

[Ember]

I never said all of those things were unquestionably good.

He said "Censorship is never, ever, ever good."

In the cases I have given, very clearly in some instances censorship can be good.

[Lune]

I never said all of those things were unquestionably good.

He said "Censorship is never, ever, ever good."

In the cases I have given, very clearly in some instances censorship can be good.

Exactly, and we can go into how the government controls and puts limits on advertising that protects you as a consumer which most people would say is inherently good or protecting a potentially innocent person from a lifetime of criminal stigma because they were arrested

[terutt]

Let me tone down what I said a little. You should not dilute discourse. Everyone should get a voice. Crazies, racists, and religiosity included.

You can't censor propaganda, because the the two concepts are parallel. One gives an organization a voice, the other removes the voice from another separate organization. One man's propaganda, is another man's television commercial, or textbook. Propaganda does not have to be false or omitting in any way to be propaganda.

I'm not against consumer protection, but there is a chasm of difference between gaining profit off of lies, and not harming an alarmingly small percentage of the population's precious virgin ears.

Also, hate speech is actually protected in this country, unless the hater hated on the hatee over CRTC controlled media.

Libel claims are not censorship, they are consequences to using freedom of speech a little too freely.

The big thing I have a problem with is, as stated above, the CRTC. It's nanny state in action.

[Silvermink]

Also, hate speech is actually protected in this country, unless the hater hated on the hatee over CRTC controlled media.

Not true. Sections 318 and 319 of the Criminal Code define the offences of "Advocating Genocide" and "Public Incitement of Hatred"; neither require communicating over CRTC-controlled media (they pretty much cover all their bases with "any audible or visible means").

[zenia]

Pff I am ok with hearing 'bitch' and what sounds like 'fuck me'... *looks it up* Yep. Pinks 'Stupid Girls' has this in the lyrics: 'Pretty will you **** me girl, silly as a lucky girl' and I am pretty sure that when I am listening to it, it does say 'fuck' and isn't censored. 'Faggot' doesn't really upset me either. I mean, I prefer not to hear it, but I don't really care if it is in a song when I can't tell what it says.

[Kithop]

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/com100/2011/r110121.htm

Looks like the CRTC is asking the CBSC to review their decision, because, you know, it was stupid to begin with. c.c

[Univaded_Fox]

But if I really say it, the radio won't play it
Unless I lay it between the lines

-Peter, Paul & Mary