observer Posted December 11, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 Unfortunately, to be classed as "free" speech, it has to be available to the bozzos too! The debate now for the Arabs, is whether they had revolutions to go forward into democracy, OR to go backwards into theocracy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted December 11, 2012 Report Share Posted December 11, 2012 Unfortunately, to be classed as "free" speech, it has to be available to the bozzos too! The debate now for the Arabs, is whether they had revolutions to go forward into democracy, OR to go backwards into theocracy! looks like the latter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleopatra Posted December 12, 2012 Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 You really must try to keep up with the news, you armchair critics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted December 12, 2012 Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 You really must try to keep up with the news, you armchair critics. do you mean the bit about Morsi trying to give himself dictatorial powers or the bit about death and destruction on the streets of Egypt, Syria, Libya? Hardly shining examples of a forward step towards democracy....., Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 12, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 Think we're fairly up to date Queenie; we get it on the TV news nearly every night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 12, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 Think we're fairly up to date Queenie; we get it on the TV news nearly every night. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dizzy Posted December 12, 2012 Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 And as repeats too just so we don't forget aint that right Obs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted December 12, 2012 Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 And as repeats too just so we don't forget aint that right Obs Une faux-pas, n'est-ce-que? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted December 12, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 Unfortunately, even with repeats, some messages don't get through! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted March 15, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2013 Having spent £millions of tax-payers money on an Inquiry, Dave decides to ignore it's recommendations at the last minute - seems the Press still strike fear into the political class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted March 19, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2013 Well Dave's backed down - but according to the news, the Editors don't have to sign up to this scheme - so what's the point of it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted March 19, 2013 Report Share Posted March 19, 2013 Clegg and Milipede are for it which makes me think it's a bad thing. There's already enough in the way of law to control the press if it is used properly. I think political control of the press would lead to the politicians taking even more liberties than they do no.w Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted March 19, 2013 Report Share Posted March 19, 2013 Half in agreement with Asp, We need a free press of that I have no doubt. But we can not let the press get away with what they have been doing, whether we need a law to do that I am no longer sure, One thing I am certain about is poor people as well as rich people should be able to take the press to task if they have been wronged, it should not depend on how much money you have. As a democrat making laws to curb the press does not sit comfortably with me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted March 20, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2013 There's a difference between the free speech of individuals, (although in this PC world that's under threat); and the corporate antics of the press in trying to make the news, rather than report it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted March 20, 2013 Report Share Posted March 20, 2013 I agree Obs, but can you legislate against them effectively, without it effecting them holding the government to account, which a democracy needs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted March 20, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2013 Think the requirements of the Act or "Royal Charter" are in line with Levenson's multi-£million Inquiry conclusions and the concerns of "Hacked Off" as representatives of the aggrieved parties - however, time and the effectiveness of it's enforcement will tell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted March 20, 2013 Report Share Posted March 20, 2013 Democracy's need a free press, Their is no doubt that our press or at least sections of it over stepped the mark, but legislation does not sit well with me. The trouble is I have no solution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted March 20, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 20, 2013 Well, at least your staying in character! The question is, do we really have a "free" Press anyway, when it's controlled by a few Barons? What has opened up "freedom", is the net, but even that can be abused and no doubt they'll have to look at that at some point in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted March 20, 2013 Report Share Posted March 20, 2013 Well I can see after the comment about schools in Warrington Obs, why you are in favour of not being challenged and found out, but lots of people do like a free press and like them to ask awkward questions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted March 25, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 25, 2013 There's a difference between investigative journalism as exampled by the Telegraph's exposure on MPs expenses in public office, and the intrusion into peoples private lives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleopatra Posted March 25, 2013 Report Share Posted March 25, 2013 With you there osberver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted March 25, 2013 Report Share Posted March 25, 2013 I agree Obs, but if you make a law for one, you make both harder And what does Phone Hacking come under? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted March 26, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 The problem is/was, that even the Police were afraid of the Press or even in their pay in some cases; so "the law" as it stood, wasn't even enforced properly; elements of the Press had assumed a position above the law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted March 26, 2013 Report Share Posted March 26, 2013 You are correct, I would go further the politicians were afraid of the press also, like the NUM, the press thought they were untouchable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.