bigtakilla said:
Censorship is censorship. Just because it has only noticably changed in one thing, we simply do not have the insight to know what else it has changed. There could have been numerous changes. |
Oh for the love of...THIS HAS BEEN STANDARD OPPERATING PROCEDURE FOR PUBLISHERS AND CREATORS FOR CENTURIES. My word, if most people were aware of the enormous changes made in the creation and publication process of books to avoid controversies that could turn off their main audience, they would have a stroke. And the same goes for movies, tv shows, video games, everything. And it has been that way since LONG before the internet and SJWs and all these other boogymen. The people who brand games like Star Ocean 5 with a scarlet letter for changing a pair of panties not only are missing the forest for the trees (there are far more dangerous forms of censorship and publisher tyranny to be worried about) but also implicitly support the concept of a work of art being nothing more or less than the sum of its parts and changing any one is unacceptable and irreparably damages the whole. Which is patently untrue and a rather adolescent view of a work of art. It also implies the original is the unfiltered vision of the artist which is also patently untrue, as publishers and the artist himself constantly think and rethink the impact of the details of their work on the intended audience. Very few just spew out their unfiltered vision and the majority who do are not successful.
In short there's a reason why I call stuff like this localization edits and not censorship. Yes, censorship's black letter denotative definition fits, but the current outright toxic connotation does NOT fit. Censorship is also broad denotatively and lacks precision. Censorship technically is everywhere, all the time, and is even necessary to a civil society. But we don't say that because we intentionally use other terms to avoid stretching the word censorship too far because then it loses all connotative impact.
