I haven't browsed TechDirt in a while due to some onerous workload, but I recently returned to find this article and wonder aloud whether I should bother reading any more.
I'm not sure why I thought I would read here an interesting take on the balance between free speech protection, balanced against the need to protect children from unexpected exposure to mature content. You know, like the issue of whether stores should be criminally penalized if they sell M-rated games to children.
Instead, the author here scarcely mentions some Supreme Court cases while engaging in a cavalcade of insults and ad-hominem attacks. "Do-gooders on one side, real people on the other." (People who do good aren't real, and people who are real aren't good? What the fuck kind of cynical world do you want to live in?) "Prudish busybodies"? And a hearty helping of "I was a foul-mouthed kid, therefore [yours is/yours should be/what's wrong with you]?"
Nothing but a brush-off of the concerns that a kid watching his baseball idol or other celebrity use profanity might actually indeed, inspire the kid to use it? And what consequences s/he might face? Not just from his own "prudish busybody" parents, but moreso from his schoolteachers, or future employers? No point in going to see if there's any, you know, scientific research on the subject, or other expert opinions? Just a bunch of smart-mouthed insults?
Top-notch editorial journalism right there, yup...
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by diadmer.