Skip to content or view screen version

Hidden Article

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Neither side of the debate is tenable !

Martina | 01.09.2000 14:10

In the debate on censorship, a fascinating paradox has emerged: neither the position of censorship, or of unrestricted 'free speech' prove to be absolute ideals.

In the circumstances, where one can certainly promulgate one's own message, if one has a printing press, distribution network, and the guarantee to be left alone by the police, but where, in practice, one can never compete with the outpourings of Mills n Boon or Readers Digest, it is important to 'err' on the side of openess.
It seems that the general stance on censorship changed somewhat in 1998. 'Index on Censorship' openly pontificated on whether it should be allowed after all, incidentally, permitting themselves the use of 'hate' words ' that they would condmen in others.. Was it merely coincidence that Labour had recently been returned to power ? But I certainly don't feel comfortable with all these 'guidelines'. Someone seems to want certain ideas kept firmly under control, and that is not healthy for the left, is it ?

Martina