Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ucsd!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucivax!jpallen From: jpallen@ics.uci.edu (Jonathan Pine Allen) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: Re: Sears/IBM vs. GEnie Message-ID: <270832F4.4201@ics.uci.edu> Date: 2 Oct 90 06:25:56 GMT References: <182@netsys.NETSYS.COM> Reply-To: jpallen@ics.uci.edu (Jonathan Pine Allen) Organization: UC Irvine Department of ICS Lines: 23 In article mcb@reason.ig.com (Michael C. Berch) writes: >My understanding is that GEnie is owned and operated by General >Electric Information Systems, and that Sears and IBM operate the >PRODIGY Service as a joint venture. PRODIGY is definitely >"information-controlled" (I prefer not to use the term "censored", >which implies state action) by its management; I do not know whether >GEnie is. I find it interesting that this article, and the one before it, suggest that censorship is a concept that can only be applied to the "public sector". I think it's more useful to think of censorship as a description of the information flow restrictions that exist in a certain context, given the mix of private and public information sources, their associated costs, audiences, ease of access, etc. I would argue that in a situation where the "public sector" got completely out of the business, i.e. no more Internet, and the only means left for distributing our various net boards would be through "information-controlled" databases such as PRODIGY, we would be fully justified in invoking the heated devil-term of "censorship". JPA