 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
I listened to a podcast the other day called Revisionist History. The author is an ex Washington Post journalist.
He claims the USA is the only society that has true freedom of the press. It immediately got my back up being British.
He went onto explain that they can cover stories that may uncover and unleash threats to national security. Most responsible journalists discuss their findings with the FBI/CIA/Goverment prior to disclosure before disclosing said information.. in order to act in the public's best interest.
I wondered how it differed from our own.
Apparently our press isn't truly free and our Government can actually close down stories they believe to threaten what THEY determine to be in the best Public Interest. Using a certain law I've since forgotten the name of.
Both ways make sense to me, but since I was sent to Iraq in 2003 I have little-to-no faith in our Governments and find myself leaning towards the USA's approach to Freedom of the Press and Speech.. than our own.
Anyone care to comment? Without losing their shit..  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"We have a biased media in both countries, partly due to ownership. There are always ways to stop stories that are unwanted and they are used."
Oh.. agreed.. totally. But if you had to choose one system or the other? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The internet is taking over from the press.Here and over there and it's an echo chamber."
Thd internet creates echo chambers too.
You only have to see far left and right on youtube and forums |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
No press is totally free anywhere in the world.
In both the UK and USA the press is licensed and the government of the day can revoke said licence at any time without giving a reason. Also the press is only free within the law, even the US first amendment right to free speech is not an absolute right although many have tried to claim it is.
Fact is in any sovereign state ultimate power in everything lies with the state and any rights devolved from the state to either individuals or organisations are only temporary boons that can be revoked at any time should the state choose. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The internet is taking over from the press.Here and over there and it's an echo chamber."
Maybe it has not registered on you Bob but states around the world are now beginning to regulate the internet, this regulation will only become greater over time. Eventually all internet content will be controlled by the state (and that is coming faster than you would think). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago
Bristol East |
The only "control" I'm aware of in the UK is the Defence and Security Media Advisory Notice, or D-notice, system.
That, and the same laws that the rest of us must comply with.
The D-notice dates from WW1 and is voluntary agreement between the state and national media designed to prevent disclosure of information harmful to national security.
The record is patchy. Editors sometimes comply with a D notice and sometimes they do not. It is not legally enforceable.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"The only "control" I'm aware of in the UK is the Defence and Security Media Advisory Notice, or D-notice, system.
That, and the same laws that the rest of us must comply with.
The D-notice dates from WW1 and is voluntary agreement between the state and national media designed to prevent disclosure of information harmful to national security.
The record is patchy. Editors sometimes comply with a D notice and sometimes they do not. It is not legally enforceable.
"
That's what I was on about.. the US has no such thing as a D notice |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I'd prefer some control with oversight and appropriate openness about the type, if not the details, being made public. It's about the level of censorship and control, all of which currently exist in the UK and USA. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Theres a new political split and its not left or right but about those that favour freedom and those that favour authoritarian control.
Its the one thing that unites some lefties with righties and some righties with lefties.
.
Me personally I'm for the smallest possible state involvement in life. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Theres a new political split and its not left or right but about those that favour freedom and those that favour authoritarian control.
Its the one thing that unites some lefties with righties and some righties with lefties.
.
Me personally I'm for the smallest possible state involvement in life."
I don't want ANY authoritarian control over me.. but I accept that there are some, who need controlling because they are simply too dangerous/stupid/vulnerable to be left unattended.
I do see the benefits of control, but I despise being told what to do by anyone, let alone a government with its head up it's arse.. and police with a raging power hard on.
I respect the job the police do.. I've done similair stuff myself, but the second I bump into one with an attitude.. it doesn't go well for either of us.
There is a local one who looks down his nose at me a fair bit.. no idea why, I don't know him, done nothing to hurt him.. but he stops me when he can and is a total arse when he does. I've since learnt some personal stuff about him, I may bring up next time we meet  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Theres a new political split and its not left or right but about those that favour freedom and those that favour authoritarian control.
Its the one thing that unites some lefties with righties and some righties with lefties.
.
Me personally I'm for the smallest possible state involvement in life.
I don't want ANY authoritarian control over me.. but I accept that there are some, who need controlling because they are simply too dangerous/stupid/vulnerable to be left unattended.
I do see the benefits of control, but I despise being told what to do by anyone, let alone a government with its head up it's arse.. and police with a raging power hard on.
I respect the job the police do.. I've done similair stuff myself, but the second I bump into one with an attitude.. it doesn't go well for either of us.
There is a local one who looks down his nose at me a fair bit.. no idea why, I don't know him, done nothing to hurt him.. but he stops me when he can and is a total arse when he does. I've since learnt some personal stuff about him, I may bring up next time we meet "
.
Those that seek power and authoritarian control over others will NEVER be satisfied by one rule or two rules or three rules.... There'll always be some reason that they justify why they NEED it.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
"Theres a new political split and its not left or right but about those that favour freedom and those that favour authoritarian control.
Its the one thing that unites some lefties with righties and some righties with lefties.
.
Me personally I'm for the smallest possible state involvement in life.
I don't want ANY authoritarian control over me.. but I accept that there are some, who need controlling because they are simply too dangerous/stupid/vulnerable to be left unattended.
I do see the benefits of control, but I despise being told what to do by anyone, let alone a government with its head up it's arse.. and police with a raging power hard on.
I respect the job the police do.. I've done similair stuff myself, but the second I bump into one with an attitude.. it doesn't go well for either of us.
There is a local one who looks down his nose at me a fair bit.. no idea why, I don't know him, done nothing to hurt him.. but he stops me when he can and is a total arse when he does. I've since learnt some personal stuff about him, I may bring up next time we meet .
Those that seek power and authoritarian control over others will NEVER be satisfied by one rule or two rules or three rules.... There'll always be some reason that they justify why they NEED it.
"
Agreed, if someone has to be given power.. give it to the person who begs you not to give it to them.. not the person begging for it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *mmabluTV/TS
over a year ago
upton wirral |
"I'd prefer some control with oversight and appropriate openness about the type, if not the details, being made public. It's about the level of censorship and control, all of which currently exist in the UK and USA. "
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Theres a new political split and its not left or right but about those that favour freedom and those that favour authoritarian control.
Its the one thing that unites some lefties with righties and some righties with lefties.
.
Me personally I'm for the smallest possible state involvement in life.
I don't want ANY authoritarian control over me.. but I accept that there are some, who need controlling because they are simply too dangerous/stupid/vulnerable to be left unattended.
I do see the benefits of control, but I despise being told what to do by anyone, let alone a government with its head up it's arse.. and police with a raging power hard on.
I respect the job the police do.. I've done similair stuff myself, but the second I bump into one with an attitude.. it doesn't go well for either of us.
There is a local one who looks down his nose at me a fair bit.. no idea why, I don't know him, done nothing to hurt him.. but he stops me when he can and is a total arse when he does. I've since learnt some personal stuff about him, I may bring up next time we meet .
Those that seek power and authoritarian control over others will NEVER be satisfied by one rule or two rules or three rules.... There'll always be some reason that they justify why they NEED it.
Agreed, if someone has to be given power.. give it to the person who begs you not to give it to them.. not the person begging for it."
.
Its relevant to politics, its what we see going on in the US right now with the spying on carter page!.
I was told by Fabio that the FBI had him under surveillance before the dossier.... Well Martin Luther king was under surveillance by the FBI for years as well.
I ask, was he guilty? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
To D Notice or not to D Notice, which would you prefer?
I think I prefer no D Notice.