I'd say that's the exact same tactic.
Those who make up Liberty's "population" are students attending by their own volition and are there specifically because they share the same cultural worldview as the institution -whatever its censorship tactics or however similar they may seem to China's.
However, in both cases the censorship is an effort to save face with their supporters. China doesn't want its Communist supporters to know how rich their party leaders are (a big no-no in communism), and Liberty doesn't want its conservative students to know that they receive massive amounts of federal money (a big no-no in American right-wing anti-government-spending rhetoric).
Obviously it's a futile effort, but it's obvious that China and Liberty both had the idea of punishing journalists and suppressing information in the same way and for the same fundamental reasons.
Am I completely crazy, or does anybody else see the obvious parallel?
They have options. I'm not sure the Chinese population have (such an easy) option to get around it.
Or is that not allowed for students of the university? Sorry, I didn't read the full article.
I think it is very inaccurate to portray the environment and "conditions" at Liberty as a microcosm of the US, let alone as an apt comparison to the people of China being kept in the dark by their government.
