WAS ECONOMIST DECISION PREMATURE?

Reporters without Borders has commented on The Economist issue with a press release condemning the Thai government's decision to ban distribution of this week's issue. The release says: " Reporters Without Borders condemns yesterday’s decision by the Thai government to ban distribution of the 22 January issue of the London-based Economist magazine ..."
The fact is the magazine has NOT been banned. The decision to withhold distribution was taken by a commercial organization, and given the potentially offending story remains freely accessible in Thailand some five days after first appearing on the Internet it's possible that decision was premature. We will never know if the current issue would have been subject to an official ban if the publisher and distributor had distributed as normal.
I am not denying there are wider issues surrounding this case, however it's a constant frustration to see issues being incorrectly reported by news media and organizations that should know better.