>If I own a newspaper I can decide what I publish in the paper.
If you own a newspaper, you pay people to write FOR you. These people are your employees.
If you host a *public* blogging platform, you can certainly disallow what people are allowed to publish there, but you don't get to not call it censorship.
Oh please. Why do people (mostly American) trot out this narrow, legalistic, definition of "censorship"?
Blogger is a site where the public can post their communications. If Blogger is deciding certain communications are unacceptable and is either hiding them or disallowing them entirely, it's still censorship.
Just because Google isn't a government, doesn't mean it can't engage in censorship.
Never mind parental controls, how about user controls over app permissions? (ie. putting the user and their privacy/security first.)
Strange, I have a Nexus 7 (2012) with Lollipop 5.0.2 and it's fine for the most part, wiht the only niggle being the occasional lag that occurrs shortly after unlocking it when it polls online services like gmail.
Essentially, they have a prophylactic to protect them from the virus that is vaccination denialism?
Living on Earth may be expensive, but it includes an annual free trip around the Sun.