"I do not believe in censorship, but I believe we already have censorship in what is called marketing theory, namely the only information we get in mainstream media is for profit"

Sam Sheppard’s words challenge the conventional view of censorship as a government- or authority-imposed restriction. He points out that even in societies priding themselves on free expression, a subtler, often invisible form of control influences what information reaches the public. This control does not come from legislation or open decree, but from the pervasive logic of marketing and profit. The selection of news stories, coverage angles, and topics in mainstream media is often determined not by their importance to public discourse, but by their potential to attract viewers, sell ads, or boost circulation.

This profit motive acts as a filter, shaping both what is presented and what is absent. Content that can be sensationalized, that appeals to advertisers, or that avoids controversy with powerful business interests occupies center stage. Subjects deemed unprofitable, perhaps because they challenge dominant commercial narratives or invite criticism from sponsors, are neglected or omitted entirely. Sheppard’s assertion reveals how this system can be as restrictive as formal censorship. The reader or viewer, unaware of what is missing, consumes a curated version of reality.

Implicit in the statement is a broader critique of capitalist mass media. Sheppard draws attention to the power relationships underlying information flows: corporations, advertisers, and media conglomerates are gatekeepers, not by imposing bans but by structuring incentives and shaping preferences. The profit-driven selection process can dampen debate, stifle dissent, and limit the diversity of perspectives available to the public, all while maintaining the appearance of free speech. The information environment becomes, in essence, a marketplace where only what sells is told.

Sheppard’s insight urges critical awareness of these hidden dynamics. True freedom of expression requires not only the absence of overt censorship, but vigilant attention to the subtler ways profit motives influence what voices are amplified, and which are silenced before they ever reach an audience.