Skip to main content

View Diary: Ted Rall was on the radio discusing DKOS censorsip (266 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Telling someone they cannot... (25+ / 0-)

    shit all over your personal property is not censorship. I do not have to let you come into my house if you fail to heed my warning not to call my kids stupid turds. One has the right to regulate who can enter their privately owned space and what conduct is allowed. Rall is no more being censored than the Tea Party people who are not allowed to come here and campaign for Republicans.

    When the Network bleeps out curse words on a TV show, they do so because the government has censored that content in that context. When movies cut content to earn a desired rating, they engage in self-censorship voluntarily to be allowed to show their movie at a desired venue.

    A private person has no ability to censor another private person without that person's consent.

    Markos has in no way prohibited Rall from publishing those cartoons elsewhere. He has only excluded them from the space he pays for and that is affiliated with his name and reputation, which is his right. He has asked Rall to self-censor his work before publishing it on Kos. Rall can and has decided not to do so, but he has no constitutional right to post here whereas Markos has the legal right to control this space. Rall has no right to post them here anymore than he has the right to hang them up in the Guggenheim, which is also not censoring Rall by refusing to give a space to his cartoons.

    I am so tired of people claiming censorship who clearly do not know what it is.

    **Electing Republicans to the government is like hiring pyromaniacs as firemen. They all just want to see everything burn to the ground.**

    by CatM on Fri Dec 06, 2013 at 05:36:10 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Like it or not, Daily Kos is a modern media outlet (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Victor Ward, corvo

      of sorts, not just a private online chat group. If a newspaper prevents publication of something, it could be dubbed censorship. You're confusing the common usage of the term to label unreasonable suppression of ideas with the actual more neutral definition of censorship. You have every right, as does Markos and admin., to claim this is justified censorship. But that doesn't alter the meaning.

      But Rall is claiming not just censorship of his art, but more censorship of his ideas. He's saying, and I think there's some justification to it in the case of a certain group on this site who've tried to run him out of town from day one, that the "racism" accusation is being used as a pretext to censor his criticism of Obama. You're welcome to disagree with that, but I happen to think it has some merit, despite the fact that some others on Daily Kos were sincerely, non-politically offended by Rall's art work.

      "Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt

      by Kombema on Fri Dec 06, 2013 at 06:12:13 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Wrong (21+ / 0-)

        You are just wrong. A newspaper is not censoring you if they refuse to publish your letter. And newspapers routinely do edit the letters and articles submitted to them, yet it is not censorship.

        Like it or not, Daily Kos is privately owned and does not have to allow content it does not support.

        No one is oppressing Rall or his ideas. He is free to start his own Website or to submit his work elsewhere. He is also free to hone is drawing skills and to stop drawing images that are readily viewed by most as offensive.

        Further, I am not confusing anything. You are confusing the common usage of censorship as actually being a correct notion of what censorship is. It is not correct.

        I asked my aspie son--who has never heard of Daily Kos, Rall, or even the historical offensive depiction of black people as Simian--what the cartoon by Rall in the Atlantic article looked like. He said, "Someone from planet of the Apes?" but then changed his mind to a really bad drawing of Arnold Schwarzenegger. So, the simian features are pretty obvious.

        Finally, Rall's self-serving claim to victimhood underscores his wilfull insensitivity to the concerns of the black community and others opposed to racism. I have not commented on Rall's ideas because I do not read his cartoons. Yet I waded into a post about this and was shocked anyone would pretend the obvious is not true--Rall has clearly drawn Obama with Simian features. His claim that it is not intentional would hold more weight if he acknowledged others' feelings about it and modified the drawimg to look less apelike. His refusal to do so and whining about censorship suggests he drew him that way deliberately and resents being asked to draw him differently.

        I could care less whether he is allowed to post here or not, but I fully support the decision by Markos to require everyone on this site to avoid seemingly racist depictions of others. Rall is the only one who seems to have a strong desire to do so, despite others making their feelings known.

        It is simply not censorship no matter how much you or he want to pretend that it is.

        **Electing Republicans to the government is like hiring pyromaniacs as firemen. They all just want to see everything burn to the ground.**

        by CatM on Fri Dec 06, 2013 at 06:42:13 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I just want to add (22+ / 0-)

        Daily Kos is a business. It has employees and offices, files taxes, and sells services. It is strongly identified with an individual named Markos Mousilitas who is sometimes invited to appear on television, publishes books, and is sought out for his views. As a business entity and a public persona, Markos has a vested interest in protecting his reputation, avoiding certain controversies, and ensuring that others feel comfortable coming to visit his site.

        He has no obligation to risk having his name associated with content he and others find offensive or racist and damaging his business because some people do not understand the meaning of the word censorship.

        **Electing Republicans to the government is like hiring pyromaniacs as firemen. They all just want to see everything burn to the ground.**

        by CatM on Fri Dec 06, 2013 at 06:49:51 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Yes, he has a right to censor whatever he likes, (0+ / 0-)

          and to think that in some cases he might be protecting his reputation from being smeared by ill-intended absolutists. But it's a two-way street, as we are seeing with the Rall interviews and negative publicity over the incident happening in the progressive blogosphere.

          But you're right, can't have faux racist witch hunts muddying things up -- the Establishment Beltway Dems might be very critical of Rall, and that would be bad for business.

          "Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt

          by Kombema on Fri Dec 06, 2013 at 08:07:59 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Let's play a game (12+ / 0-)

            Let's pretend for a moment that your self-serving, incorrect definition of censorship is correct and that censorship occurs when any private property owner refuses to allow a visitor to express himself however he pleases on the owner's property.

            Please explain what message Markos was trying to prevent Rall from expressing.

            1. Markos did not ask Rall to change a single word of the cartoons.

            2. Markos did not ask that Rall change the positioning of any character in the image.

            3. Markos did not ask that Rall change the expression on anyone's face in the cartoon.

            Markos had one demand: that Rall draw Obama in such a way that it could not be mistaken for an attempt to draw Obama with Simian features. That's it.

            So, what message would it prevent Rall from expressing were he to, for example, change Obama's face to a circle with two eyes, a small nose, and a line for a mouth -- yet keep every word and every position the same as it was?

            If, as Rall claimed, his drawing of Obama with features that to others appeared Simian was wholly unintentional, then that means he was not using those facial characteristics to communicate anything.

            If he is being "censored," as you and he claim, by being asked to revise that drawing style of the president's face, that means he intended to express something by drawing the president as he did. What was it, then?

            I think I know what it was. Do you?

            Of course, this is all academic because censorship does not occur when a newspaper refuses to run your crappy column, a magazine refuses to publish your offensive photograph, Marvel refuses to publish your new comic book starring Hairdryer Man, or a network refuses to air your lame new comedy about brothers and sisters who marry each other--even if you try to foist it on them for free.

            Just because Rall refused to acquiesce to a simple demand that he redraw--NOT rewrite or reconfigure, just redraw--something he has insisted was not meant to communicate anything about the president and thus can no longer post here doesn't prevent you from ever seeing Rall's work. It only prevents you from seeing it here, on this piece of private property.

            **Electing Republicans to the government is like hiring pyromaniacs as firemen. They all just want to see everything burn to the ground.**

            by CatM on Fri Dec 06, 2013 at 09:06:20 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Ha ha! O.k., let's assume for a moment that (0+ / 0-)

              your erroneous and pedantic definition of censorship were not as such, and that it was, say, closer to the American Civil Liberties Union's accurate definition!

              What Is Censorship? (2006 resource):  Censorship, the suppression of words, images, or ideas that are "offensive," happens whenever some people succeed in imposing their personal political or moral values on others. Censorship can be carried out by the government as well as private pressure groups

              "Government by organized money is just as dangerous as Government by organized mob." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt

              by Kombema on Fri Dec 06, 2013 at 09:53:57 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Thanks for playing (7+ / 0-)

                But the ALCU is also a bit self-serving. However, I suspect even the ALCU would not agree that an editor of a paper or site refusing to publish material he/she considers offensive is engaging in censorship.

                I like how you avoided explaining what Rall was trying to express that would be "censored" by his having to draw the president with less Simian features while leaving everything else the same in order to post here.

                **Electing Republicans to the government is like hiring pyromaniacs as firemen. They all just want to see everything burn to the ground.**

                by CatM on Fri Dec 06, 2013 at 10:04:01 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site