The definition of the word censorship can be complex, as Wikipedia assessed this:
censorship (censura) is a political procedures to the mass media or in the personal services (such as by post ) gave content to control or suppress undesirable laws that run counter to provide content and thus ensure that only desired content to be published or shared.
This brief, but accurate explanation should suffice to illustrate. that has received Federal Family Minister Ursula von der Leyen their nickname because of the notorious difficulty Access Act against the spread of child pornography, is now not a novelty anymore. So far, however, was the name "Zensursula" exclusively on the side effects of Internet blocking due to a key part of this access difficulty Act ...
A video of Mirror Online shows that censorship also to her or her party colleague Gitta Connemann obviously happy to be applied and relevant. The accompanying press release can be found here . Since I am neither a lawyer nor a journalist, I can make do not know if and who was invited to this event or whether general may attend any of these events and may. To this end I have to rely on expert declaration and would be glad if this would take but one, a comment function is given ...
update from 27.08.2009
In Empty Generalanzeiger found something like an opinion of Gitta Connemann to the incident with the mirror-TV team in child flu
... This writes the Leeranerin, it had informed the editor of "Mirror TV" about the fact that it is the appointment is no public date constitutes "good reason, after all, where children of nursery age were assembled with one thing: a right to their own image, the parents informed were from the community Westoverledingen and had agreed that the photographs would make these photos were provided so the.. required parental consent. A film company was not desired. A film permit by the municipality Westoverledingen as hostess was not present. "It was certainly a difference if the photo printed of a child aged three years in the local newspaper with the consent of parents will be identified or vulnerable on a number of television viewers and Internet visitors can, according to the MPs: "Discussion Item in the matter, visit by Minister von der Leyen? is therefore not an alleged violation of press freedom. Rather it is about the desperate attempt of a journalist, in violation of domestic law and personal rights of children is a film portrait of produce through the back door ."...
basically puts this statement the supposed freedom of the press. Remains an open question However, why then ever previously issued a press release? Furthermore, it is incomprehensible why not in this release was made clear that this deadline is a closed society of charged persons? one hand is the consent of the parents of the infants cared for there to photos given by the press, on the other hand, this should exclude any further press work such as film shooting by a team from Spiegel TV commentary. I understand now no longer what it publishes press releases and press freedom is defined as ...
comment feature also forms the transition to another case, a different kind of censorship. As I mentioned earlier, I am not a lawyer and you may forgive my amateur opinion should ever have to do so. On various web sites, that such comment functions. In my opinion for that area to offer this to the author of articles a way to connect with readers to interact and provide readers with a public discussion based on the treated subject to offer. If no comment is desired, can also disable this feature. As it is, however, to judge if a web site operator, the comment function first makes available and, upon receipt of various comments that were not weighed him, turned off abruptly and without comment and the comments made by then virtual nirvana banned?
Is it a coincidence that of all Family Minister Ursula von der Leyen is again of the party, as the CDU-Sulzbach local association, the comments the article "Sympathetic woman smitten Sulzbach " disabled after some comments represent a markedly opposite view to the appearance of the Minister. It is, of course, any operator of a site permitted and in some cases mandatory, content that are illegal or offensive seem to remove. In the current case, I could not find such, only has strongly criticized the practice Ursula von der Leyen and criticized especially their rhetoric during their propaganda event. If any comments should have in fact contravene netiquette, it certainly would have been sufficient to remove only these individual disorders. However, without comment, the comment function was disabled on this article ...
My comment, which was initially released for about 1 day was so:
The lies of the campaign, Ursula von der Leyen
Do not worry, I will maintain the netiquette and factual arguments. The video from the auditorium in Sulzbach, where Mrs. von der Leyen offered about 7 minutes against alleged Internet blocking their fight against child pornography in a complete argument, haunted by the "evil" Internet. Although all their specious arguments are refuted, without exception, it retains eagerly made use of it. Of course it applies to combat child pornography, but the choice of means should be farsighted be selected. The stop signs of the so-called access difficulty to the law are good or not much, but suggest ignorant fellow citizens, this woman is doing what von der Leyen for abused children. She does not just, but covered only the terrible image documents from the Internet community. Functioning measures have been offered to her, but she insisted on a solution, which only damaged the constitution, established a censorship infrastructure and to help abuse victims in any way. Can it really be that party members tolerate unscrupulous machinations of this or is anyone in the CDU's local chapter so far have noticed that Mrs. von der Leyen taken at least at this point, a direction has, which is completely absurd. About the invariable applause after it had carried out their fake numbers and bogus arguments, I was more than surprised. If for all blind and deaf from the CDU, or do they just do not have true, that this woman publicly distributed lies? An opinion would be desirable ...
Whether it is now in the process actually is censorship, I do not want to look more closely, feel it, but annoying when pruned in this form, the freedom of expression just because one criticism can bear. The "friendly woman smitten Sulzbach" therefore continue exceptionally pure and ...
0 comments:
Post a Comment