Page 182 - 4188

180

It can’t be because our beliefs and opinions don’t matter – they
often matter greatly. Yes, censorship can interfere with the competition
of ideas and the evolution of better ones, but regulation can
interfere with innovation in most any area. Yes, we do like to interfere in

the competition of ideas by favoring some ideas via school curricula,
public service messages, and subsidized art. But we still usually stop
short of actually censoring messages opposed to those we favor and

subsidize.
Actually, we don’t stop short as much with for-profit corporations.
For example, we won’t let alcohol makers advertize the fact that most
research finds those who drink more are healthier. But we are more

reluctant to limit what non-profits can say about the subject. This
suggests to us that one big thing going on is an anti-dominance instinct
against for-profit firms. We are in general reluctant to limit choices,

whether of ideas or other things, but we are more willing to make an
exception for products and services offered by for-profit firms,
especially big ones.

One big noteworthy exception to this pattern is reporters; we are
reluctant to limit what large for-profit news firms can say. News firms
have somehow sold themselves as being smaller opponents of bigger

maybe-illicitly-dominating governments. When most firms are regulated
against their will, they are also smaller opponents of bigger maybe-
illicitly-dominating governments. But in those cases we side with the
bigger governments against the smaller firms. So why side with big

news firms against a bigger government?
We suspect there are multiple equilibria here. When governments
limit criticism we accept their claim that firms must not be allowed to

speak freely, but when news firms are allowed to tell us they shouldn’t
be censored, we believe and support this position.

ASSIGNMENTS

1. What does the term “paternalism” mean?
2. What do paternalistic regulations limit?
3. What should officials consider when considering any particular

regulation?
4. Why are people so eager to regulate so much individual behavior, yet
so reluctant to endorse censorship according to the author?