6 Oct 2010 | Index Index, minipost
The organiser of an exhibition of anti-death penalty posters has cancelled the event, because he feels it has been censored. Herve Matine said that councillors wanted to split up the collection, placing the more graphic images in a separate room with limited access. He was told that around a third of the posters, some of which depict hangings, would be moved because they could influence young people. DUP councillor Brian Kingston called the exhibition “disturbing”, but Matine stressed the importance of “public awareness”.
6 Sep 2010 | Uncategorized
A while back, representatives of Index and other organisations and individuals signed a letter in response to what was seen as a censorious attempt to stop bookshops hosting signings of former Prime Minister Tony Blair’s new autobiography, A Journey.
The letter said:
When it comes to literature, drama, journalism, artistic expression and scientific publication we must be consistent in our support for free speech. How can we defend the right of the Birmingham Repertory to put on and advertise a play like Behzti, despite it being deemed offensive to some Sikhs, and then call on a bookseller not to promote one of its books – or a library not to stock it — on the grounds of offence? The answer, in a liberal society, is to not read the book if it offends you, and to not buy a copy if you don’t wish royalties to go to the author.
Since then, things have changed. On Saturday, Blair’s signing in Dublin was the subject of a rowdy protest by members of the anti-Iraq war Socialist Workers Party and Republican group Eirigi, who objected to Blair’s role in the Northern Ireland peace process.
The signing went ahead, but under a massive security operation.
Today, it’s been announced that Blair will not be signing books in London. Blair said:
I have decided not to go ahead with the signing as I don’t want the public to be inconvenienced by the inevitable hassle caused by protestors
This seems practical, but hardly ideal. Clearly the violent scenes in Dublin have made Mr Blair think again. But would things in London inevitably have turned out the same? I’m not sure. An equivalent group to Eirigi does not exist, and the groups that have previously protested against Blair have not, to be fair, turned violent.
Then again, they might have decided to follow the example of the Dublin crowds.
In which case, a literary event has been closed down due to fear of violence.
Which, to me, sounds like mob censorship.
(And no, I am not for a moment questioning the right to peaceful protest.)
23 Aug 2010 | Uncategorized
It’s reassuring that defence secretary Liam Fox isn’t very busy. In spite of an ongoing war, massive budget cuts, and the threat of resurgent violent republican groups in Northern Ireland, Fox obviously has plenty of time on his hands to talk about computer games.
What’s less reassuring is that when Fox does talk about computer games, he comes up with an opinion as silly and nonsensical as calling for a game to be banned.
Fox thinks war game Medal Of Honour should not be stocked in shops, cos you can play as the Taliban as well as playing as Nato forces.
“It’s shocking that someone would think it acceptable to recreate the acts of the Taliban. At the hands of the Taliban, children have lost fathers and wives have lost husbands. I am disgusted and angry. It’s hard to believe any citizen of our country would wish to buy such a thoroughly un-British game. I would urge retailers to show their support for our armed forces and ban this tasteless product.”
Does Fox really think that soldiers in Afghanistan are weeping themselves to sleep at night due of the thought that someone might be playing the baddies in a computer game? Does he think that Medal Of Honour might encourage young people to join the Taliban? Did Fox only ever play Escape From Colditz as the British? Was Buckaroo banned from his house because it endorsed animal cruelty? And how pathetic is this attempt to curry favour with the military shortly before he starts sacking people?
We need answers!
20 Aug 2010 | Uncategorized
The Home Secretary has banned the English Defence League from marching through Bradford.
The Home Office has said:
“Having carefully balanced rights to protest against the need to ensure local communities and property are protected, the Home Secretary today gave her consent to a Bradford Council order banning any marches in the city over the bank holiday weekend.
“West Yorkshire Police are committed to using their powers to ensure communities and property are protected and we encourage all local people to work with the police to ensure community cohesion is not undermined by public disorder.”
The letter from the Home Office confirming the ban is interesting, saying:
The application from the Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police is clear that the activities of some who attend English Defence League protests — and indeed counter protests — has little to do with freedom of expression. So while the Government has set out its commitment to restore rights to non-violent protest, we are equally clear that such rights do not extend to intimidation, harassment, and criminality, and that rights to protest need to be balanced against the wider rights of local communities.
It’s nice that the notion of free expression is even acknowledged here.
But we must wonder: can we be free in a society that places public order above all other concerns?
Again, (see previous post)I’ll ask why offensive, potentially confrontational marches are allowed take place throughout Northern Ireland, but not in England?
