In reply to Paul Lawley-Jones.

@Dan Knauss,

Actually, I wasn't saying either of those things. I was just making the comment that your debate with Paul Lawley-Jones was missing the mark because you were all taking culturally-specific positions.

The UK certainly recognizes a distinction between public and private. But the way in which it draws that distinction is somewhat different from the way the US draws it. The application of the Human Rights Act, for example, means that what would be considered private entities in the US are often regulated as public entities under that Act.

On censorship, as Paul Lawley-Jones's approach exemplifies, the UK focuses more on the effect on the would-be speaker than on the entity attempting to restrict the speech.