Re:Censorship (Score 1)

I find it rather convenient that liberals consider it censorship when a commercial company chooses not to support a person or a film. Disney was completly in their rights to not want to release the film. They make decisions all day to not release movies, why do the liberals jump on this one? Maybe they just didn't think it would make much profit (which would have likely been the case if the liberal media hadn't jumped on this and labeled it a 'censorship' controversy). Maybe they just didn't like the film, which is completely in their right to choose. Read the Eisner response to this outcry at the nytimes here: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/10/opinion/L10DISN. html The same crap happened when Stern got taken off of some of the radio stations. Look, if a commercial broadcaster can't choose the content they play over their station, why does the FCC fine them when the content breaks laws? The answer is that they are indeed responsible, and they get to choose if they want Stern or not... What about the Reagans special that was made for TV (by CBS?) and then they decided not to show it. Remember they are a commercial entity, and profits come from pleasing as many viewers as possible. They decided not to show the movie, and the liberals hounded them as well. I guess it's the commercial business model of going for doing what your CUSTOMERS want that the liberals have a problem with.