Britain: Freedom Gone?
by metatron 24 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
jhine
Sadly I think that it may be on the way out the door .
-
Abaddon
Yes, and you would believe an article by one of the papers most opposed to regulation for what reason? Come on Metaron, you read the WT and A! long enough to pick up on the loaded language, surely?
And let's make no mistake, by regulation we are talking about (for example) making newspapers more laible for unwarranted intrusions into people lives. An example is when the some of the British press systematicallym over several years hacked into the voicemail of celebrities and private individuals who had come to the attention of the press - like a 14 year-old girl who was abducted and killed and whose parents were given false hope when their daughter's voicemail was picked up (as they thought it was her, not some gutter-rat scum sucker).We are not talking about any real restrictions on newspapers reporting real news. We are talking about protecting members of the public from tabloid newspapers who don't care whose lives they wreck if it sells some copies. And make no mistake that newpapers couldd still publish what they wanted... they would just be more accountable for their actions, and people wrongly slandered by the press would be more likely to see some justice.
The newspapers would rather self-regulate, which is a bit like sharks self-regulating if it is bad to eat people.This article is slightly more intelligently written, but then the Guardian is a proper newspaper, not a hate-rag:
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/oct/30/press-regulation-royal-charter-approval -
cantleave
The Daily is writing from a very biased position. The Royal charter will not curb press freedom but will allow for penalties against press abuse. You need to understand the climate in which this legislation evolved. The press in the UK have been found guilty of appalling misconduct and they have shown that they can not regulate them themselves without such a framework in place.
-
tim hooper
This might clear things up a little: http://toys.usvsth3m.com/are-you-hated-by-the-daily-mail/
-
tornapart
Well, I think if it stops the press being able to hack into people's phones and invade their privacy it's not such a bad thing. The press go far beyond decency.
-
metatron
Really?
When does any government take away freedom without first putting up a good excuse? Do they ever say, "look, we're doing this to protect the elite and make it convenient for us to control you"?
Abuse by the press? The answer is NOT to censor them or "regulate" freedom of the press - it's to hold individuals responsible for phone tapping/listening or libel.
You know what's the saddest part about this? That so many people fail to see the "coincidence" of this happening - behind closed doors - while Snowden exposes wrongdoing AND while more accounts emerge about sex crimes by the elite, reported to be covered up by Scotland Yard and the BBC.
I'm not getting on a 'high horse' here because obviously the US already has a corporate-filtered press.
metatron
-
metatron
Oh, look.... Japan wants to silence journalists, too. Must be another coincidence. Clearly, I'm just being a conspiracy theorist.
Nothing to worry about, folks. Return to your distractions. Hey, I hear Kim Kardashian lost a lotta weight.....
metatron
-
besty
There is no way to convey the sense of sadness I felt when I saw the OP subject and poster and realized a Daily Mail link was 100% sure to be there.
So, so sad. Just sad. Did I say I was sad?
-
Phizzy
We have allowed the erosion of our freedoms to take place here in the U.K, and this present bunch of buffoons we call our Government would like to remove even more.
Having said that, all freedoms come with responsibilities. And as Cantleave says above, much of the British Press have not lived up to their responsibilities.
But it is th responsibility of each Citizen to try protect the freedoms we have gained, and so our voice of protest should be loud when Government or anyone wishes to remove or erode freedoms simply because they are inconvenient to those who Govern.