[psiconaut]

But that is precisely what I was talking about. You do not seem to find any commonality between censoring different categories of websites or apps. As far as I understand it, "media", "gambling", "porn", "politics" are quite common categories when researching (and defining) online censorship. See, for instance, https://censoredplanet.org/censoredplanet

You say "banned", but that is not quite the same as "censored". Just try and search, you will see the US "bans" and China or Iran "censor". Perhaps one regime's "censorship" is experienced as "lawfully banned" from within the context of their legal and cultural system.

And no, I don't see why would I keep my edgy observations to myself. That would be self-censorship :)

[tgv]

Because it isn't censoring. Censoring is selective removal of information. This is wholesale. The tiktok ban isn't even about suppressing information. If you search for e.g. the Moscow Times, you'll also find words like "banned", "declare illegal foreign agent" in the Western press. Censorship already applied to that news outlet, but after the feb 2023 offensive, the Russian state simply forbade the whole publication.

> You do not seem to find any commonality between censoring different categories of websites or apps.

The fact that they're different is important. Pornography is really different from journalism. Aversion against public nudity and sexual acts is deeply ingrained in many cultures, if not all. It also doesn't serve any democratic goal. Freedom of porn isn't a human right.