I have a very specific definition of censorship. Censorship must be done by the government or it's not censorship.
Overall there may be less censorship in America than in China, but censorship and self-censorship are not only from political pressure, but also pressures from other places in a society.
Chinese central government doesn't need to even lead public opinion: it just selectively stops censorship. In other words, just as censorship is a political tool, so is the absence of censorship.
Be quiet or I'll be forced to flick you." "Ooh," he mocked. "The ultimate threat. I don't think I've ever been flicked before." "Are you suggesting I can't hurt you?" "On the contrary, I think you have the power to do great damage.
Chick flick is not a term used to praise a movie. Nobody says 'it's a great chick flick.' It's a way of being derisive. I'm not clear why it's ok to do it.
In Formula 1 it's easier to dial out the balance issues and perfect it, whereas in IndyCar it's more difficult to dial out those characteristics with mechanical changes in the pits. Instead you have to drive around it.
Self-censorship happens not only in China, or Iran or ex-Soviet places. It can happen anywhere. If an artist penetrates a certain taboo or a certain power through their work, he or she will face this problem. I'm always saying that commercial censorship is our foremost censorship globally today. Why do we still pretend we are free?
I am against censorship. I don't think there is anything more stupid than censorship.
It is a misuse of words if you say 'content censorship'. But no censorship does not mean there is no management.
Any country that has sexual censorship will eventually have political censorship.
A dreary censorship, and self-censorship, has been imposed on books by the centralization of the book industry.
There have been so few decent films involving Negroes that right away everybody expects every film to do everything. But when you make a flick, there are maybe two things you're trying to put into that flick. You can put the other things in another time.
I know that many writers have had to write under censorship and yet produced good novels; for instance, Cervantes wrote Don Quixote under Catholic censorship.
I am not asking for government censorship or any other kind of censorship. I am asking whether a kind of censorship already exists when the news that forty million Americans receive each night is determined by a handful of men responsible only to their corporate employers and filtered through a handful of commentators who admit to their own set of biases.
In China, the problem is that with the system of censorship that's now in place, the user doesn't know to what extent, why, and under what authority there's been censorship. There's no way of appealing. There's no due process.
There is a long standing tradition of using code to evade censorship in China, so that goes on. The trouble is the Chinese government has created the world's most sophisticated censorship machine.