Target Australia pulls GTA V from shelves, response to Change.org petition

[WelshBloke]

At no point in the definition of censorship does "coercion" appear. Censorship can be voluntary. They've chosen to censor it based on the concerns of a particular group. That it's only one (now two, with KMart) retailer or a voluntary act does not prevent it from being an act of censorship.

They have not censored it, they have decided to not sell it. If they had altered the product then you could accuse them of censorship.

 

[GoodRevrnd]

I don't think anyone is accusing Target itself of censorship. And it is this group's right to ask Target not to sell something. All we're saying is that this group which is advocating for media not to be sold, based solely on the fact that they find the content offensive, is censorious, which contravenes core ethical principles necessary for a free society.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

I don't think anyone is accusing Target itself of censorship. And it is this group's right to ask Target not to sell something. All we're saying is that this group which is advocating for media not to be sold, based solely on the fact that they find the content offensive, is censorious, which contravenes core ethical principles necessary for a free society.

I wouldn't even go so far as to say that a boycott or petition "contravenes core ethical principles necessary for a free society"; it's their right to petition and Target's right to determine whether to acknowledge the petition or ignore it. But it is a censorious act, and the people who have said "it's not censorship" are fighting a semantic battle that the dictionary disagrees with.

 

[WelshBloke]

But it is a censorious act, and the people who have said "it's not censorship" are fighting a semantic battle that the dictionary disagrees with.

Thats a real stretch to include not selling something. I cant find any definitions that meet that apart from in the most tenuous way.

If you want to put up a definition that includes individual retailers choosing not to sell an item I'd like to see it.

 

[WelshBloke]

I don't think anyone is accusing Target itself of censorship.

So if Target isnt doing the act of censoring who is?

And it is this group's right to ask Target not to sell something.

And its Targets right to listen or not. And your right to agree or disagree.

All we're saying is that this group which is advocating for media not to be sold, based solely on the fact that they find the content offensive, is censorious, which contravenes core ethical principles necessary for a free society.

No. Being able to express your opinion is essential to a free society. Also the right to ignore others opinions.

 

[smackababy]

So if Target isnt doing the act of censoring who is?



And its Targets right to listen or not. And your right to agree or disagree.



No. Being able to express your opinion is essential to a free society. Also the right to ignore others opinions.

The problem is, people in Australia don't have the right (anymore) to ignore certain people's opinion that GTA5 is objectionable in some way. That right is literally being stripped from them by a bunch of people who find the content distasteful. Here is the thing: nobody is saying they aren't entitled to have that opinion, just that I don't want that opinion forced upon me, regardless if I agree or not. If you think GTA5 (or any media) is not appropriate for you and your children, don't give it to them. Taking it away from me is not appropriate in the least bit.

 

[WelshBloke]

The problem is, people in Australia don't have the right (anymore) to ignore certain people's opinion that GTA5 is objectionable in some way.

Of course they do.

That right is literally being stripped from them by a bunch of people who find the content distasteful.

Those people haven't even stripped you of the right to buy it from that store. They have no more power to force the store to stop selling it than you have to force the store to sell it.

Here is the thing: nobody is saying they aren't entitled to have that opinion, just that I don't want that opinion forced upon me, regardless if I agree or not.

So you want to force your opinion on the retailer? Your opinion is irrelevant. Its up to the retailer whether they sell the product or not. Just because you don't like their decision doesn't suddenly mean peoples right are being stripped away.

If you think GTA5 (or any media) is not appropriate for you and your children, don't give it to them. Taking it away from me is not appropriate in the least bit.

My opinion on GTA5 is irrelevant, its the stores opinion not mine that matters here.

You dont have a right to demand that stores carry the products that you like.

 

[BoberFett]

It's censorship no matter how you spin it. We all censor ourselves every day based on common decency. Some of us censor less than others, but everybody engages in some level of censorship constantly.

Whether you feel a particular level of censorship is acceptable is again up to you. Target has every right to censor the items they carry. Some people aren't happy with it and are voicing their displeasure. It's that simple.

 

[WelshBloke]

It's censorship no matter how you spin it.

There's no spin, it's just not censorship.

We all censor ourselves every day based on common decency. Some of us censor less than others, but everybody engages in some level of censorship constantly.

That's as maybe but it's irrelevant to this situation.

Whether you feel a particular level of censorship is acceptable is again up to you. Target has every right to censor the items they carry. Some people aren't happy with it and are voicing their displeasure. It's that simple.

Target aren't censoring anything. If they were they would be changing the content of the game to their demands.

Just making a decision is not censorship no matter how much you say it is.

Words have meaning. You need to choose the ones that encapsulate your meaning not change the definitions to fit your ideas.

 

[Bateluer]

There's no spin, it's just not censorship.



That's as maybe but it's irrelevant to this situation.



Target aren't censoring anything. If they were they would be changing the content of the game to their demands.

Just making a decision is not censorship no matter how much you say it is.

Words have meaning. You need to choose the ones that encapsulate your meaning not change the definitions to fit your ideas.

By the definition of the word, Target's actions are a form of censorship; "the practice of officially examining books, movies, etc., and suppressing unacceptable parts."

By refusing to sell the game based off the opinions of an extreme minority, Target is suppressing the game. Hence, censorship. The fact that its a completely pointless form of censorship is irrelevant; its still censorship.

 

[PrincessFrosty]

I'm not sure making an online petition to complain about someone else making an online petition is the best way to make a point.

Sitting up a business next door to target and selling the product would probably make the point better.

That's not what the petition about the Bible was about, it wasn't a complaint about a complaint it was no different from the GTA V takedown request, but it makes the point perfectly, if you read between the lines.

 

[Sulaco]

Oh look, WelshBloke arguing against everyone for the sake of arguing.

 

[Rezist]

It's kinda funny but if governments issued licenses for having children based on the competency of parents we would not have this issue.

 

[TheSlamma]

Australia is full of inbred prisoner descendants. Can't say I expected much from the outback.

Kind of amazing since the US is puritan based. I would think Aussie would have done better

 

[Anteaus]

I'm not sure what the controversy is. While I don't agree with Target's decision, I applaud how it took place. There was no censorship or government intervention. A number of Target customers signed a petition declaring that they would prefer that Target not sell GTAV, and Target listened.

CVS in the United States decided to stop selling cigarettes because they felt it wasn't good for their customers. I don't see how this is any different. Had the government intervened and banned GTV5 from the country, I could definitely understand the angst. However, that isn't what happened in this case. This is one retailer who decided to stop selling a product. Aussies can still get their GTAV fix from other places.

I realize we are talking about Australia and not the United States, but having a free market means that that store owners have the right to sell or not sell whichever legal goods they want. I don't believe that anyone here offered this opinion, but if any one feels that Target should have been forced to continue selling GTAV, think about if that applied in the other direction.

I own GTAV, but I still support Target if they decide that the game is too violent, and I would respect any retailer that pulled it from the shelves as long as it isn't government forced.

 

[WelshBloke]

Oh look, WelshBloke arguing against everyone for the sake of arguing.

Oh no! Someone having a discussion on a discussion board.

Far better to have a circlejerk with no dissenting opinions.

 

[shortylickens]

Australia is full of inbred prisoner descendants. Can't say I expected much from the outback.

I'd like some inbreeding with her, kthnx by.

 

[dud]

Much ado about nothing ...

 

[Bubbleawsome]

I think the decision was a stupid one, but there is nothing else wrong with it. Also, if the petition to get the bible out of their stores goes ignored, that's also solely the decision of the company. The problem isn't Target doing this, it's the people behind it. People who want to ban what they don't like.

 

[Exophase]

The problem I have with all of this is that it was the product of moral outrage brought on by deceit and manipulation.

A small group of people with particular biases misinterprets (intentionally or unintentionally) elements of a video game (possibly on the basis of videos they've seen which they've jumped to conclusions over) and starts a petition that misrepresents the game. Several people who haven't played the game jump on board, especially with a strong undercurrent of trying to protect children.

The petition's signature number get repeated throughout the media, using an inflated number that doesn't factor in the obvious duplicate signatures, signatures opposing the petition, and trolls with obvious inflammatory names. Only the total number from this flawed petition site is reported. The issues with the website were never really brought to light or encouraged to be fixed because normally no one takes it seriously.

The media places tremendous pressure on the retailer to do something about it ASAP, leaving them to make a snap decision under pressure, and one that contradicts the one they made just the day before.

The big issue with all of this is how much emotionally charged claims are accepted uncritically and amplified by society. Especially when they fall in line with existing issues of elevated social criticality like sexual violence, and when they come from particular groups that are given an extreme level of public sympathy and trust.

 

[Vicard]

AMD shaders.

 

[Bubbleawsome]

AMD shaders.

:awe:
This guy gets it