Is Bryan Garner Always Right on Usage?

Bryan Garner's "Usage Tip of the Day" is always welcome when it arrives in my inbox.  His discussion of language, etymology, and popular usage is invariably interesting and informative.  I seldom find any reason to disagree with Garner (although I once sent him a note about the proper use of "bended" in soccer writing), but his most recent email raises a question.  The entry is for "censorship," and here is what Garner says about it:

censorship (= the practice or institution of suppressing the expression of ideas thought to be uncongenial to those in power) is a word whose mention in American English immediately brings up the First Amendment. It is one of those politically charged vogue words that people use irresponsibly. It shouldn’t mean simply the denial of governmental largesse; that is, an artist who is denied federal subsidies is not the object of censorship. The word should refer to active suppression, not merely lack of support.

Is it really "irresponsible" to use "censorship" to describe something other than suppression by the government?  In an age where both the arts and science depend heavily on government grants, can it not be said that withholding support is the equivalent of censorship, at least in circumstances where there appears to be a political motive?  After all, what other word could be used to describe the phenomenon.

It seems to me that there are also other quite responsible uses of the term, including "self-censorship" in the face of threats of violence or ostracism.  Or perhaps an equivalent of censorship by private universities that refuse to provide meeting space for unpopular speakers (which can affect both the right and the left).

I tend to be conservative in my own usage, and my inclination is almost always to follow Garner's advice, but in this case I think he has carried prescriptiveness much too far.

Comments

[Captain Hruska Carswell, Continuance King]

While I was in law school during the late 80s, I recall two very relevant examples: When Chicago Alderman physically removed a painting of Harold Washington depicted wearing women's undergarments. If I recall, the City Council paid damages to the artist? A few months later, several Veterans removed an American flag displayed on the floor from the Art Institute. The exhibit was titled: "How to display and American flag." The censorship, (probably unplanned) became a part of the art.