Is Everyone Wrong About NBA/China/Hong Kong Except South Park and…Ted Cruz?
Nah, the senator's still wrong about Internet free speech, argue the editors on the Reason Roundtable podcast.

Who ya gonna believe when it comes to the omni-faceted NBA/China/Hong Kong/censorship/whatever controversy, Gregg Popovich, Donald Trump, Steve Kerr, South Park, or…Sen. Ted Cruz (R–Texas)?
That's the first of a seemingly endless number of perhaps unanswerable questions on this week's Reason Roundtable podcast, featuring Nick Gillespie, Katherine Mangu-Ward, Peter Suderman, and Matt Welch. Other queries include: Does Red China's exportation of censorship disprove the hypothesis that trade and capitalism make people freer? Is President Trump's abandonment of the Syrian Kurds a welcome clarifying agent to the U.S. body politic or a haphazard atrocity-enabler cloaked in the insincere language of imperial withdrawal? Which Democrats are most set to embarrass themselves in this week's debate? Are Tom DeLay's hips capable of lying? And can Nick's enthusiasm for Columbus Day be contained, let alone stopped?
Audio production by Ian Keyser and Regan Taylor.
"Duet Musette" by Kevin MacLeod is licensed under CC BY 4.0
Relevant links from the show:
"The NBA's China Problem Gets Worse After 2 American Arenas Eject Hong Kong Supporters," by Eric Boehm
"Activision Blizzard Sided With Chinese Communists Against a 21-Year-Old Star Player," by Robby Soave
"China Banned South Park After the Show Made Fun of Chinese Censorship," by Robby Soave
"The NBA Cares More About Making Money in Mainland China Than Supporting Freedom in Hong Kong," by Mike Riggs
"Hong Kong Protesters Combat the Surveillance State," by Zach Weismueller
"Searching for New Atlantis in China," by Michael Gibson
"Ted Cruz Wants To Punish Google Because Execs Didn't Vote for Trump," by Elizabeth Nolan Brown
"We Can Learn 3 Lessons From Trump's Partial Syria Withdrawal," by Bonnie Kristian
"Bringing Them Home? Trump Commits 1,800 More Troops to the Middle East," by Eric Boehm
"Let the Kurds Come to America," by Shikha Dalmia
"Trump Brushes Off the Threat of Free ISIS Militants Because 'They're Going to be Escaping to Europe,'" by Elizabeth Nolan Brown
"U.S. Consents to a Turkish Invasion in Syria; Kurdish Forces Call It 'A Stab in the Back,'" by Elizabeth Nolan Brown
"Democratic Candidates Promise LGBT Voters They'll Punish All the Right People," by Scott Shackford
"Inside the Pro-Trump Conference Where a Violent Meme Made National News," by C.J. Ciaramella
"Summer TV Season Launches with HBO's Murdoch-esque Succession," by Glenn Garvin
"You Know All Those Stories About The Apocalypse Being Nigh? Well, Now That Tom DeLay Is Going To Be On Dancing With The Stars, I Believe Them," by Nick Gillespie
What are we consuming this week?
Matt Welch
Katherine Mangu-Ward
- Dancing with the Stars segments - specifically Tom Delay and Tucker Carlson appearances
Peter Suderman
Nick Gillespie
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
"Well- well but- but listen, American businesses shouldn't be in the business of censoring Americans" - Ted Cruz
Yes they should be. Especially if their business relies on selling data and advertisements by letting the unwashed masses yap away and enact mob rule. It's not censorship unless the government does it. They own the platform.
Invest in a hosting company Ted. Make it so everyone has to buy and host their own domains. You know exactly how to do that. You've just solved the censorship problem. The only people that are going to continue to post if they're not getting likes or shares are schizophrenics. (Which is a shame, really. They're quite interesting)
True. But the rest of us have the freedom to boycott or otherwise disrupt the NBA and other a-holes that won't speak up for freedom of speech and democratic representative government.
"or otherwise disrupt the NBA"
Any ideas?
Even more groupies?
Insist the WNBA is just as good as the NBA?
No, they really shouldn't be. Private refusal to abide by the principles of the Constitution leads to the inevitable amending and destruction of it. Just because there isn't a penalty the government can enforce doesn't mean we shouldn't enforce a penalty as a society.
It's no different than CNN recording an interview and not using the whole thing. They're allowed to edit out whatever the fuck they want. Private companies aren't required to give you free speech. They shouldn't be either. You can buy your own website. That's freedom right there. Relying on a company to give you freedom is idiocy.
You are absolutely right that they are allowed to edit things out. That they aren't and shouldn't be required to give us anything. That we shouldn't rely on a company to give us anything.
The question at hand isn't what the NBA should be required or prohibited from doing. The question is, what's the moral thing for them to do?
Reasonable people can and will disagree on questions of morality, but "stand up for free speech" is certainly a defensible position. Or at least it ought to be.
Ideally, the market corrects, and a substitute is found (much easier for CNN than the NBA, but still).
"Yes they should be"
You're confusing 'can' and 'should'.
They're private businesses and can do what they want, but morally they shouldn't censor people. Just because I can legally cheat on my wife, doesn't mean that it's what I should do.
Morally, companies exist to serve the shareholders, so they *should do* whatever increases shareholder value the most.
Sophistry using a statement of fact, it isn't moral at all. That's like saying a restaurant feeding it's customers for $$$ is just as moral, as one who also feeds the homeless for free.
That's a special kind of stupid right there. Censorship is hardly limited to governments. Nothing in the word or concepts requires it be limited to governments. Now the corn in your toilet leavings is that they are allowed as private entities to censor as they please.
But what you failed to mention is that they get special protections against libel and defamation that ONLY apply to them as a grant from government. Those should be removed thus exposing them to the same defamation risks as any other publisher. And if you want to present Reason's mendacious position that CDA Sec. 230 is NOT a grant of special government protections, well, no thanks, we have plenty of gas at this residence already.
"That’s a special kind of stupid right there. Censorship is hardly limited to governments."
Yes, you are welcome to call it "censorship" if someone denies you the use of a platform, but that in no way denies you your freedom to make a statement.
When the folks with guns say 'you can't say that' you got censorship with no quotes.
Yes, yes it is.
It's just not a First Amendment violation. Stop confusing the two.
It’s not censorship unless the government does it? Bullshit, sure it is. it is non-governmental censorship. You forgot the dumbass talking point you were supposed to use, “something something First Amendment her drr”
American companies should not be censoring Americans in America at the order of foreign governments.
If that is too hard because you love their money more than American money, then move your HQ to that foreign country you now pledge your allegiance to and forfeit your American market.
"American companies should not be censoring Americans in America at the order of foreign governments. "
Wrong. They're doing it to keep deals. They can totally not censor. No one is ordering them. They just don't get what they want if they don't. It's a money thing. That's what happens when you combine free speech and business.
You don't have to do that.
That is not it. The complaint is that in order to open a factory in China you must partner with Chinese business. This gives them access to patented processes and manufacturing methods which can be used to make copycat products.
They still don’t know the Col. Sanders original recipe for chicken. Thank goodness for that.
And the horrible snakehead fish. Where did that come from Mr. Xi?
So the round table thinks that Cruz is wrong on China and the NBA. Not because they disagree with him on THIS particular topic, but because they disagree with him on another topic.
Solid use of logic.
Principals not principles.
Cruz is right a helluva lot more than this collection of dotards is of late
Ted Cruz is more of a libertarian than this crew.
Did you actually listen to that segment? Because I did, and what they said, paraphrased, was that while they dislike most of Cruz's positions and actions, he was the most correct in this particular situation.
Yes, I also thought the same. I wonder what have been the rules and regulations to understand the things about https://rulesofplaying.com/table-tennis-rules/
Still waiting for the list of sponsors of the NBA broadcasts so I can boycott effectively.
And ESPN
And Disney
And congress
Oh wow, Welch AND Suderman.
Look out Miss Truth, you're about to get molested.
#metoo
Found this official apology to China from the South Park creators
https://www.samizdata.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/SouthParkApology2China.jpg
South Park. Definitely. They always get it right.
Reason - Silenced Voices, Slaver Markets
Thank you for the sharing, I so enjoy it and like it.
Visit us and join us at https://bolanet88.biz/
South Park is right.
And everyone else is an asshole.
If you have to ask this question....maybe it's time to move on to other things fellas.
Anyone else remember how these people covered Obama?
Yeah, rather than give credit when he got something right they would instead immediately pivot to a discussion of whatever he got wrong.
That's how they demonstrated their deep libertarian credibility.
Just like they do now.
This whole thing is entirely of a piece with Nick's "Trust" horseshit of an article.
Snide doesn't begin to describe them all.
How in Gods name have you guys not installed a switch to mute Nick’s mic when he talks over people? Or a remote shock collar. Or something?
A great piece of information. I must appreciate this
http://pitbullbluenose.com
The best explanation always comes in the part of news and views. Studying and learning is always favored and preferred
https://mystudentsessays.com/essay-on-education-for-students/
Exam Instructions:
Choose your answers to the questions and click 'Next' to see the next set of questions. You can skip questions if you would like and come back to them later with the yellow "Go To First Skipped Question" button. When you have completed the practice exam, a green submit button will appear. Click it to see your results. Good luck!
This main thing I learn thing is entirely of a piece and truth in this article. Really nice.
Read these paragraph I hope you all reader will like my efforts.
https://studyparagraphs.co