|
|
|
|
In a letter to Sir Michael Lyons, chairman of the BBC Trust, Trevor Phillips, chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), warned the BBC that its handling of the public’s online discussion was “insensitive and irresponsible”, raising the question of whether it should be subject to new legal controls. He then added that his commission would be considering giving advice to extend the provisions of the equality bill to include the BBC’s online material.
That proposal means that the BBC, which already moderates comments made by members of the public on its website, might be legally obliged to do so — or face “enforcement action” by the EHRC and possible court proceedings. The move would also apply to Channel 4, the other publicly owned broadcaster.
So, now the Freedom of Speech advocates are weighing in and they're not happy at all. John Whittingdale, chairman of the Commons culture committee, said the BBC had been “offensive and irresponsible” but it should not be subject to “state censorship”.
Mark Stephens, a media lawyer who has been leading a commonwealth campaign against a proposed law in Uganda to execute gay people, said: “This is a pathetic attempt to censor free speech on a matter of enormous public interest. We must protect freedom of speech whether it is offensive or not. The alternative is to drive the debate underground.”
Okay, but what I find interesting were comments made like these:
D Spock wrote:
A badly worded question and they go on a nasty witch hunt. They don't care who they destroy as long as they meet their political agendas.
M Smith wrote:
I think that Trevor Philips (and Harriet Harman) should be censored - the rest of us could then enjoy the freedom that is an essential component of our way of life. Already there are so many laws and conflicts of interest that some employers (notably the public sector) have simplified them down to: never criticise homosexuals (no matter how outrageous their lifestyle); and: if anyone claims to be 'offended' by a Christian, bundle the said Christian off the premises and out of his job.
Brian Williams wrote:
Has this guy Phillips even read 1984 by George Orwell? Has he got the slightest idea what the people will do when they find that they are being controlled by a totalitarian state? I can't think of a better way to send the nation into the arms of the BNP than to try to suppress all forms of dissent? No longer does anyone say "I disagree with what you say but will defend with my life your write to say it". The tone now is "you will agree with what I say or you will pay with the disagreement with your life".
Judy Walton wrote:
Why are we all being gagged? This is most sinister.
The flip side of those arguments were comments posted just before the BBC closed them down such as these:
Chris from Guildford wrote: “Totally agree. Ought to be imposed in the UK too, asap. Bring back some respectable family values.”
Another contributor, Aaron, wrote: “Bravo to the Ugandans for this wise decision, a bright step in eliminating this menace from your society.”
Well, at least the British public is alot more politer about being arses than the American public. Of course it is the season I guess. My hometown paper in Toronto was forced to close its comments after a story because of severe homophobic remarks this past week.
So, should the BBC 'police' the public? In fairness, I've seen some drastic & nasty comments from LGBT folk too. Where does one strike a balance with all this?
One must act with caution and prudence when applying any form of moderation that could lead places that aren't good for everybody.
-
Attachment: NOH8.jpg
(Size: 34.44KB, Downloaded 323 times)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13796
|
|
|
In my view Phillips is mistaken.
The BBC has declared standards under which people may comment. It has simply proved itself to be poor at enforcing those standards. However a complaint about a message slipping through often, (always?) leads to its removal if it breaches the standards. So they have two levels of moderation with pre-moderated comments:
1) Remove the most inappropriate, try for the rest
2) handle complaints
I can live with that
What irked me was the headline of the debate - horribly biased - and the way my formal complaint was handled, or rather ignored.
No, I think Phillips is pushing his own agenda, and he is the one who needs to be restrained.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That, Timmy, sounds too libertarian even for me.
Surely T Phillips can complain. Surely the BBC ought to be criticised for failing to meet their own standards. Surely extreme homophobic remarks ought to be removed wherever they are found.
Love,
Anthony
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
