anshul - 5:14 am on Jan 30, 2012 (gmt 0)
Journalists may be having interests in technology and in freedom of expression or opinion. But governments and organisations are the ones who prefer to keep stagnancy and keep banning anything what that stirs movement of and flow of information and knowledge. Internet censorship is becoming common and dilute and they ban even anything whatever they want to. At least they should be a way to read censored content. Censorship is valid but need justification.
Journalists and rabble-rousers have little interest in technology itself.
If I am posting something against the government or the organisation or against some eminent personality and they ban it then it hurts the freedom of expression. Still banning is critical as it may be required to ban #*$! and malicious content provoking terrorism or hatred.
What (they should) to ban and what not to ban is the root problem.
[edit: removed line-breaks]