censoring content, comment

Margaret DeLacy's picture


The role of new information technology in the 21st. century and the role of government regulations on the public's access to information pose increasingly difficult problems as evidenced by two articles that both appeared in the New York Times on Nov. 1.

Springer Nature, one of the world's largest publishers of scientific journals, has joined Cambridge University Press in admitting that it agreed to remove materials from its online publications that were available online in China.  (Cambridge backtracked on this following public comments).

Springer defendedd itself by arguing that less than 1% of its content had been blocked on Chinese servers by the Chinese government .  However that amounts to more than one thousand articles. "Springer Nature Blocks Access to Articles in China," NOV. 1, 2017, 7:12 A.M. E.D.T.https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/11/01/world/asia/ap-as-china-censorship.html

In the mean time, members of the United States Congress continued to denounce Facebook, Google and Twitter for accepting paid advertisements from Russian agents that were intended to sow divisions among Americans and discredit Hillary Clinton's campaign.

"Russia-Financed Ad Linked Clinton and Satan, NOV. 1, 2017https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/01/us/politics/facebook-google-twitter-russian-interferenc...