[net.rumor] Doonesbury censorship

donn@utah-cs.UUCP (Donn Seeley) (10/02/84)

The Deseret News in Salt Lake City is proud to be able to continue to
carry Doonesbury as it has since the strip was first syndicated, except
of course the first three daily strips won't be published because they
are so offensive.  Far be it for me to accuse a church-owned newspaper
of hypocrisy...  but if they find the strip offensive, why don't they
let some other local paper run it?  Is the revenue generated by
Doonesbury so great that the publishers can't afford not to print it
(most of the time)?

The Indonesian government has a system of repression that is remarkable
in its subtlety, and I wonder if a variation is being applied here...
The technique is to allow dissident groups to publish and organize, and
merely arrest and confine demonstrators for a few months when trouble
brews up.  The guiding principle is that it is better for dissidents to
be public, where they can be controlled, than underground, where they
can be dangerous.  (Really dangerous people are arrested and not heard
from again; this is less often murder than it is abuse and internal
exile.  Internal exile is a wonderful thing -- one wonders whether the
Indonesians used the Gulag as a model, or were simply imitating the
hated Dutch.) Perhaps the publishers of the Deseret News consider it
more useful to publish Doonesbury themselves so they can censor it when
the necessity arises, rather than let it run wild in some secular
newspaper...

Have other folks seen this censorship?

PO'ed,

Donn Seeley    University of Utah CS Dept    donn@utah-cs.arpa
40 46' 6"N 111 50' 34"W    (801) 581-5668    decvax!utah-cs!donn

PS -- There is an obvious place for messages like this, but of course
we don't get net.flame in Utah...