State censorship in Britain

[fela fan]

Here's what I mean about your understanding of how the press operates - the US situation is FAR freer in theory because it's impossible to get punitive damages for libel - it's against the 1st Amendment, but goes back to the founding of the US and how they saw the libel laws used in Britain not as a way of protecting the truth, but as a way of suppressing dissent.

Any chance of doing me a favour mate? Or anyone else.

I'd like to reply to this post properly but have never got the hang of quoting selected bits and replying to them point by point. How the fuck is it done?!

But to the point above, you mention 'in theory'. Point taken, but in practice...

 

[yield]

It became very apparent that no matter how much you think a media organisation purports to offer balanced and objective journalism, it's like Heidegger's uncertainty principle, the more objective you try to be, the more your coverage is influenced by what your own personal idea of objectivity is.

Don't you mean Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle?

Definitely interesting to hear your experiences in Media.

This is going to go back to Chomsky a bit - all journos self-censor/spin at the first instance according to their own worldview;

What little I've read of Chomsky I generally agree with, regarding Manufacturing Consent etc.

Actually thinking back the first person who comes to mind is in the USA, Robert Scheer who was fired from the LA Times.

 

[kyser_soze]

Any chance of doing me a favour mate? Or anyone else.

I'd like to reply to this post properly but have never got the hang of quoting selected bits and replying to them point by point. How the fuck is it done?!

But to the point above, you mention 'in theory'. Point taken, but in practice...

Easiest way is to highlight the bit of text you want to quote and copy/paste it into the edit box, then put the [quote ]TEXT'[/quote ] tags around it - don't have a space after the last letter tho...

There's not much I can say that Chomsky hasn't about the self-censoring of the major US press. Again tho, it's extremely difficult to compare UK/US because the closest the US has to National Newspapers are probably The Wall Street Journal and Washington Post - and both of those only to those who's jobs/interests means they take an active interest in non-local policy (try to think of the US as 50 different countries when it comes to news). In the US it's TV and radio that are the 'national' media - and the internet of course, but that again is a different kettle of fish.

Since the introduction of the Patriot Act and it's constitution-trampling powers (which are being challenged - it just takes a while for cases to wind their way up from local-district-state-Supreme Courts), there have been more cases of 'offending' journalists having materials and storage equipment seized (altho AFAIK the US isn't locking them up yet, nor are there Mcarthy style HUAC committees in Congress) - and this has been reflected in the until recently craven way in which the US media has behaved WRT to the Bush administration (ignore Fox - it was set up as a right-wing news source).

But this is about UK state censorship, not American. What's funny is Soulman choosing the last example of the UK government actively attempting to at least ensure someone they didn't like, and the mirth it generated in almost all quarters. While the OSA probably does mean there are some things we don't see that maybe we should the most serious stuff almost always gets leaked - hell, pretty much everything gets leaked in this country, including stuff that really and truly should be sub judice!

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

Don't you mean Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle?

Yeah, that's the one.

Definitely interesting to hear your experiences in Media.

Was a very interesting experience.