i'm not performing censorship by selecting which files i download from the internet, am i?
> "Criteria for inclusion" and "censorship" are the exact same thing, the only difference between them is how the speaker feels about it.
yes, this is very important, which is exactly why a library like this selecting which works to include is not censorship. now if people intentionally submitted their own works and the library tried to hide or deny the existence of those requests, now that would be censorship
i think state libraries are in a slightly different situation. it is definitely fuzzy though
> i'm not performing censorship by selecting which files i download from the internet, am i?
Yes, because that's an irrelevant activity to this topic.
> yes, this is very important, which is exactly why a library like this selecting which works to include is not censorship.
At least in contemporary liberal culture, words like "censorship" and "ban" are frequently used to label "criteria for inclusion" that the speaker disagrees with.
> now if people intentionally submitted their own works and the library tried to hide or deny the existence of those requests, now that would be censorship
That's one kind of censorship, but not the only kind (see above).
Are you sure? Doesn't it depend on the criteria? What if my criteria is that the author not be Catholic, or that they aren't competing with my son in the pork industry?
that depends on whether your definition of censorship is the prevention of speech or prevention of dissemination of speech, whether books count as speech, whether choosing to include existing books in a library counts as speech
i think it's fairly common knowledge that preventing the publishing of a book in the first place probably counts as censorship, but considering the nature of this library it becomes pretty fuzzy
