Mediaboss Marketing

Paul F. deLespinasse| The Daily Telegram

When people can't find a good argument for something, their only alternatives are to use a bad argument or claim there is no need for one.

During the summers of 1960 and 1961, I interned in the Oregon State Public Welfare Commission's headquarters.

In 1960, the headquarters were in Portland. But Gov. Mark Hatfield proposed moving it to Salem, the state capital, 60 miles south. This upset headquarters employees. Salem was too far to commute, and they hated the idea of moving.

My supervisor had me survey our employees to see what they would do if the commission got moved. Many said they would resign.

We reported details to Gov. Hatfield. He responded that he was pleased that the employees who really counted were willing to move!

Portland's newspapers complained that it was crazy to move the commission, since most Oregon wefare recipients lived in or near Portland Oregon's largest metropolitan area.

This was a plausible argument, but it was a bad one. The commission headquarters had no contact with welfare recipients. Offices in each Oregon country had all actual contact with welfare recipients. Our headquarters just provided centralized administrative services for the county offices.

There weren't any good arguments against the move, except inconvenience for the welfare bureaucrats. The governor had argued, not unreasonably, that having the commision in the capital would make it easier to supervise and coordinate with other state agencies.

Hatfield moved us to Salem in 1961. Many of the workers changed their minds and continued working for the commission.

The Supreme Court supplies mysecond exampleof an inability to find a good argument. The court has generally been happy to support its decisions with bad arguments when it can't find good ones. But it refused to give any arguments at all in upholding the World War I military draft against claims that it was "involuntary servitude," which it clearly was if those words have any meaning:

"Finally, as we are unable to conceive upon what theory the exaction by government from the citizen of the performance of his supreme and noble duty of contributing to the defense of the rights and honor of the nation, as the result of a war declared by the great representative body of the people, can be said to be the imposition of involuntary servitude in violation of the prohibitions of the Thirteenth Amendment, we are constrained to the conclusion that the contention to that effect is refuted by its mere statement."

It couldn't even find a bad argument!

A recent example of a bad argument was contributed by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas. Objecting to DirecTV's decision (later reversed) to discontinue carrying a particular station, Cruz called it "corporate censorship."

Of course censorship is bad, and the First Amendment wisely prohibits it: "Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press."

But the First Amendment does not restrict the right ofprivatepersons or corporations to refuse to publish or broadcast particular material.

As a Harvard Law School graduate, Cruz must understand that the First Amendment's "freedom of the press" actuallyprotectsthe right of private organizations to refuse to publish or broadcast certain material. That is essentially an editorial decision not carrying the weight of governmental censorship.

If a newspaper refuses to publish something that I have written, I can submit it to other newspapers and other editors remain free to publish it. The TV station discontinued by the satellite company was still carried by cable companies and was also available over the Internet.

Governmental censorship like that in today's Russia, on the other hand, threatensanybodywho publishes the forbiden material with sanctions.

Sen. Cruz's complaint about "corporate censorship" is a good example of using a bad argument when you can't find a good one. But he must have known better.

Paul F. deLespinasse is a retired professor of political science and computer science at Adrian College. He can be reached at pdeles@proaxis.com.

Here is the original post:
Paul deLespinasse: Bad arguments attractive when good ones ... - The Daily Telegram

French President Emmanuel Macrons office forced Politico to remove some of Macrons comments on Taiwan from an interview published on Sundayafter the outlet agreed to let his team review comments before publication. As is common in France and many other European countries, the French Presidents office, known as the Elyse Palace, insisted on checking and proofreading all the presidents quotes to be published in this article as a condition of granting the interview. This violates POLITICOs editorial standards and policy, but we agreed to the terms in order to speak directly with the French president, a note at the bottom of the article said. It said some of Macrons views on Taiwan and Europes strategic autonomy were nixed. The story, published Sunday following Macrons visit to China, discussed Frances reluctance to intercede in brewing tensions over Taiwan. Politico had no further comment to The Daily Beast beyond the note affixed to the story.

More:
Macron's Office Censors Taiwan Comments in Politico Interview - The Daily Beast

Michael Tierney of The Comic Book Store in Maumelle, Arkansas has been following the progress of Arkansas Senate Bill 81 2023, and reports that it has been passed into law and forwarded to the Governor's desk to be signed into law.

When I was in Washington DC at the end of March for the National League of Cities as part of the Arkansas delegation (I'm on the Maumelle City Council), I did have a chance to ask Arkansas congressman French Hill about the Act. His advice was to do what I've already been doing.

But emails to legislators and voicing concerns on social media had no effect.

What I was afraid would happen has happened.

While I find no fault with the intent to protect children from harm, doing so with a retroactive determination that hands down felony charges based on a system of consumer complaints ratified by the decisions of an advisory board is not the way to do it. The language of what is considered harmful should never be considered a fluid thing, which is intent of SB 81.

As you might remember, I was on the front lines of this battle a little over 20 years ago when the Arkansas Legislature rewrote the Arkansas Display Act to include retroactive determinations of obscenity violations. This rewrite was determined by the Attorney General to be unenforceable after it was already signed into law. So I've watched this type of legislation very closely since that time and have noticed a distinct pattern in how it pops up around the country on a regular basis. There was an episode of the television show, Law & Order, where actress Angie Harmon stated that, "The Supreme Court determined that the definition of obscenity can be determined on a local level," and every time that show has aired some legislator somewhere in the country tried to write a law to do just that.

Here we go again.

Once more it is the store clerk and the librarian caught in the cross hairs of the battle to determine to what is considered obscene, with the publishers and creators completely insulated from any repercussions should they include content without notice. The reason I point this is because of a recent discovery I made while writing a chapter on the Dark Horse Comics series Conan and The Songs of the Dead in my Robert E. Howard 100 Year Catalog Art Chronology. I had carried this series in my stores, both of which were located in areas zoned where it was illegal to carry any content that might be considered pornographic because of my close proximity to schools and churches. When it came time to review the series I was dismayed to discover that the series not only contained the image of a fully erect penis (on a statue), that is broken off and worn around the neck by Conan, who used it to open a door lock distinctly drawn in the shape of a vagina, and later on a lock shaped like skull by inserting it into the skulls mouth.

Since Dark Horse has never offered content guidelines on their books, as a matter of rule I treated their entire line as matureand this saved me from potentially losing my life's work and reputation over something that I did not know about it. The excesses in that series went beyond what any legal body might consider as simply being "mature." Retailers dont have time to read every page of every book, and copies of this particular series are all across the country, hiding in the cheap bins like ticking bombs waiting to explode in the wrong hands. Most retailers have no idea of the risk they are being exposed to.

That is the core of my concern about SB 81, is that someone could go to jail over something they had no idea about.

It could have easily happened to me.

The opinions expressed in this Talk Back are solely those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial staff of ICv2.com.

See the rest here:
Michael Tierney of The Comic Book Store on Censorship Board Waiting for Governor's Signature - ICv2

KING WILLIAM A group of King William County citizens is calling on the Pamunkey Regional Library system to restrict childrens access to books the group considers explicit, saying they will seek to defund the entire system if the library does not comply.

The system runs libraries in the counties of Hanover, Goochland, King and Queen and King William and the town of West Point.

At the March 27 meeting of the King William Board of Supervisors, library Director Tom Shepley said restricting access to books was contrary to First Amendment rights.

During public comments, resident Sharon Landrum spoke of the brokenness of Pamunkey Regional Library system and called for a labeling and sequestering policy for sexually explicit material for children.

She questioned the countys annual contribution of more than $600,000 in fiscal year 2024 to the library system.

Another resident, Elaine Daniel, spoke of Me, Earl and The Dying Girl, a young-adult novel available in the library. She spoke of the rise in mental illness among teens and said the books characters are neurotic and nihilistic and focused on destruction.

Banned books are visible at the Central Library, a branch of the Brooklyn Public Library system, in New York City on Thursday, July 7, 2022. The books are banned in several public schools and libraries in the U.S., but young people can read digital versions from anywhere through the library. The Brooklyn Public Library offers free membership to anyone in the U.S. aged 13 to 21 who wants to check out and read books digitally in response to the nationwide wave of book censorship and restrictions. (AP Photo/Ted Shaffrey) (Ted Shaffrey/AP)

The novel, by Jesse Andrews, was released in 2012 and tells the story of two troubled teenage boys who become friends with a girl who has terminal cancer. It has faced frequent challenges in recent years from people who disapprove of the story.

Why would we offer such a book as this? We dont want to ban it but we dont want to buy books that have no good purpose, Landrum said.

Rose Marie Berberich spoke of a sex scene between minors in Looking for Alaska by John Green, a coming-of-age novel she branded obscene.

We as a public library system must hold ourselves to a standard of decency and appropriateness for all. This book should be labeled and placed in a separate area in the library due to the profanity and sexually explicit theme, said Berberich.

She called for the supervisors to defund the Pamunkey Regional Library until changes are made.

Resident Rose Bloomfield referred to Last Night at the Telegraph Club by Malinda Lo as pornographic literature. The novel won the National Book Award in 2021 for Young Peoples Literature, the first time a young adult book featuring an LGBT woman as the main character won a National Book Award.

This book is for young adults this should not be put on any kind of shelving that doesnt have a disclaimer, doesnt have a red x in front of it, she said.

Bloomfield, referencing Lady Chatterleys Lover by D.H. Lawrence, said most of the world banned such books at the time.

I dont know how we strayed so far from the banning but Id like to see it come back again, she said.

Lady Chatterleys Lover, about an upper-class woman who has an affair with a working-class man, was banned in the United States in 1929 but the ban was lifted in 1959. Bans in Europe were also overturned and Penguin Books won a landmark obscenity trial in the United Kingdom in 1960.

Shepley acknowledged that the library system has faced calls at board of trustees and other meetings to create a ratings system for books. He said no system exists at present.

Weve got over 200,000 books, he said.

The problem for us as a public library with that is the standard for making that determination in the United States with the First Amendment really rests with you, or I, or any other reader.

Shepley said, while he could determine whether a book was suitable for his children, he would struggle to make a determination for another child.

You know you children better than I do and youre the one responsible for them, he said.

Supervisor Stewart Garber asked if books that were the subject of complaints remained on the shelves. Shepley confirmed they are still in the libraries.

We are talking about young children. Well below the age. I dont even know whether the First Amendment applies to them but but theres a right and wrong here, said Garber.

Shepley said the library does have a formal reconsideration process after complaints but the books would likely stay. He said five books have been the subject of specific complaints, and that moving them could be considered a First Amendment issue.

Many of these have been on the shelves for years, but you are hearing people complain about them now, Shepley said. He said a public library is part of the government and it does not have the right to censor materials. Shepley suggested parents control their childrens access to materials they check out on a library card.

The folks that we are hearing from are trying to limit access to other people and thats where it becomes censorship, Shepley said.

No action on the issue was taken at the March 27 meeting. Supervisor Travis Moskalski, referring to it as a very highly charged issue, said it requires more consideration.

David Macaulay, davidmacaulayva@gmail.com

Daywatch

Weekdays

Start your morning with today's local news

See the original post here:
King William group pushes to censor books in public library, calls on board to defund library system - Daily Press

China, being a country with some heavy censorship rules, has had a reputation for canceling movies that showcased a different culture. Disney, being one of several companies that try to bring woke culture to kids has often run into problems with them.

In a meeting, the CEO of Disney, Bob Iger met with a delegation from the Chinese Communist Party to discuss how the company would represent its media in China better. Essentially giving China an olive branch to reconcile things, Bob Iger wishes to build upon a trusting deal that would let Disney release into the Chinese market without disturbing the thoughts and ideologies of the country.

Well, after some years of streaming services taking the lead, people tried to resurrect the art of cinema and theaters. While releasing movies in theaters, China did not allow the release of several Marvel movies due to unknown reasons, even though the censor board cleared it.

Also read: There was no way to force the issue: Marvels Ex-chairman Says He Never Conspired to Fire Kevin Feige From MCU Before Avengers: Infinity War

After the whole ordeal was over, it has been reported that a delegation from the Chinese Communist Party had a meeting with Disney CEO Bob Iger. With the intention of making things all right between the company and the country, Iger admitted that they have indeed done wrong in the past, but are willing to make up for it for a better future.

During the hour-long meeting, 10 lawmakers raised the issue of Chinas unnecessary censorship. An insider source however stated that CEO Bob Iger sorted things out and that he reconciled it between Disney and the countrys regime. The source stated that Igers aim is not to change the story but it was a value judgment and dont always get it right.

This could potentially mean that China and Disneys relationship would be on better terms now, and who knows, maybe the country would also allow the release of Marvel movies from now on. As Bob Iger tries to make it up to a country, a Floridan Republican governor wants to make the company pay!

Suggested: Tom Hollands Co-star Charlie Cox Was Embarrassed About His Cameo in $1.9 Billion MCU Film After Poor Reaction From Audience: It was dead f**king quiet!

Related: We have to look at what stories we are mining: Disney CEO Bob Iger Hints Trimming Down $51.8B Star Wars, $40.8B MCU Franchise Movies to FocusonQuality

With all the anti-LGBT bills that Florida seems to want to pass, Disney was scolded by Floridan Governor Ron DeSantis. Having heard enough of it, Bob Iger lashed out at the governor, as he said that a company deserved the same freedom of speech that an individual may hold.

It seems like hes decided to retaliate against us, including the naming of a new board to oversee the property and the business, in effect to seek to punish a company for its exercise of a constitutional right. That just seems really wrong to me.

The CEO further continued,

Any action that thwarts those efforts simply to retaliate for a position the company took sounds not just anti-business, but it sounds anti-Florida. And Ill just leave it at that.

It seems that if things get worse, Disney may soon have a panel of oversee directors operating over the mass media company. The case is currently on trial as the judge prepares for the next hearing of Disney vs the governor.

Source: CBR

Go here to see the original:
Disney CEO's Olive Branch to China Amidst Heavy Censorship Backlash - FandomWire