正文
关于西方的言论自由、新闻自由本质上是怎么回事，不妨看看如下文章：
看过乔老<<制造共识>>那本书没有？没有的话应该看看，那是经典，下面这个是乔老最近的发言
乔姆斯基：新媒体终究还是在“制造共识“
guancha.cn/QiaoMuSiJi/2015_04_27_317408.shtml
这是当年一个美国巴勒斯坦裔教授因反以色列言论获罪受迫害的故事：
www.nytimes.com/2002/01/27/opinion/protecting-speech-on-campus.html
这是为CNN卖命20年的记者，因为一条悼念死去的Shi'ite 著名宗教领导人去世的tweet而被解雇的故事：www.salon.com/2010/07/08/media_259/
这是去年夏天一个教授因为反对以色列滥杀巴勒斯坦人的几个tweets被伊利诺伊大学违约不给tenure的case：www.theguardian.com/education/2014/sep/09/professor-israel-criticism-twitter-university-illinois
谷狗搜索“fired for speech, 你可以找到更多
帮斯诺登爆料的记者GLENN GREENWALD写过不少西方控制言论因言治罪的文章，这是其中的俩：
firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/01/06/police-increasingly-monitoring-criminalizing-online-speech/
firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/01/14/days-hosting-massive-free-speech-march-france-arrests-comedian-facebook-comments/
这是斯诺登爆的英美政府如何控制操纵网络言论，这大概也部分解释了为什么西方不像中国有那么多反体制的大V： firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/
这是英国在讨论要通过的新法律（土共搞法制不妨学英国跟着制定类似法律）：
“The measures would give the police powers to apply to the high court for an order to limit the “harmful activities” of an extremist individual. The definition of harmful is to include a risk of public disorder, a risk of harassment, alarm or distress or creating a “threat to the functioning of democracy”.
The aim is to catch not just those who spread or incite hatred on the grounds of gender, race or religion but also those who undertake harmful activities for the “purpose of overthrowing democracy”.
They would include a ban on broadcasting and a requirement to submit to the police in advance any proposed publication on the web and social media or in print. The bill will also contain plans for banning orders for extremist organisations which seek to undermine democracy or use hate speech in public places, but it will fall short of banning on the grounds of provoking hatred.
It will also contain new powers to close premises including mosques where extremists seek to influence others. The powers of the Charity Commission to root out charities that misappropriate fund”
先把西方看懂了，咱再讨论中国是不是没有言论“自由”，为什么没有。
另外，不妨想想，为什么有“言论自由”的西方（包括港台）对中国的报道都是充满着偏见和谎言，导致老百姓对中国基本不了解，而且充满着偏见和误解。没”言论自由“的大陆人民，对西方和港台的认识反而更全面少偏见？
___________
所以，威胁既得利益和权势阶层的言论自由，威胁体制的言论自由，哪个国家都是不可能有的，中国没有，西方也没有。中西的区别在于反对势力的力量不一样，政府和权势阶层操控舆论的能力不一样，如此而已
看过乔老<<制造共识>>那本书没有？没有的话应该看看，那是经典，下面这个是乔老最近的发言
乔姆斯基：新媒体终究还是在“制造共识“
guancha.cn/QiaoMuSiJi/2015_04_27_317408.shtml
这是当年一个美国巴勒斯坦裔教授因反以色列言论获罪受迫害的故事：
www.nytimes.com/2002/01/27/opinion/protecting-speech-on-campus.html
这是为CNN卖命20年的记者，因为一条悼念死去的Shi'ite 著名宗教领导人去世的tweet而被解雇的故事：www.salon.com/2010/07/08/media_259/
这是去年夏天一个教授因为反对以色列滥杀巴勒斯坦人的几个tweets被伊利诺伊大学违约不给tenure的case：www.theguardian.com/education/2014/sep/09/professor-israel-criticism-twitter-university-illinois
谷狗搜索“fired for speech, 你可以找到更多
帮斯诺登爆料的记者GLENN GREENWALD写过不少西方控制言论因言治罪的文章，这是其中的俩：
firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/01/06/police-increasingly-monitoring-criminalizing-online-speech/
firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/01/14/days-hosting-massive-free-speech-march-france-arrests-comedian-facebook-comments/
这是斯诺登爆的英美政府如何控制操纵网络言论，这大概也部分解释了为什么西方不像中国有那么多反体制的大V： firstlook.org/theintercept/2014/02/24/jtrig-manipulation/
这是英国在讨论要通过的新法律（土共搞法制不妨学英国跟着制定类似法律）：
“The measures would give the police powers to apply to the high court for an order to limit the “harmful activities” of an extremist individual. The definition of harmful is to include a risk of public disorder, a risk of harassment, alarm or distress or creating a “threat to the functioning of democracy”.
The aim is to catch not just those who spread or incite hatred on the grounds of gender, race or religion but also those who undertake harmful activities for the “purpose of overthrowing democracy”.
They would include a ban on broadcasting and a requirement to submit to the police in advance any proposed publication on the web and social media or in print. The bill will also contain plans for banning orders for extremist organisations which seek to undermine democracy or use hate speech in public places, but it will fall short of banning on the grounds of provoking hatred.
It will also contain new powers to close premises including mosques where extremists seek to influence others. The powers of the Charity Commission to root out charities that misappropriate fund”
先把西方看懂了，咱再讨论中国是不是没有言论“自由”，为什么没有。
另外，不妨想想，为什么有“言论自由”的西方（包括港台）对中国的报道都是充满着偏见和谎言，导致老百姓对中国基本不了解，而且充满着偏见和误解。没”言论自由“的大陆人民，对西方和港台的认识反而更全面少偏见？
___________
所以，威胁既得利益和权势阶层的言论自由，威胁体制的言论自由，哪个国家都是不可能有的，中国没有，西方也没有。中西的区别在于反对势力的力量不一样，政府和权势阶层操控舆论的能力不一样，如此而已
评论
目前还没有任何评论
登录后才可评论.
