Political correctness doesn’t go mad, it is mad

To realise how intellectually inconsistent PC politicians really are, consider this from Hazel Blairs:
„Although warning that people should not set out to “deliberately offend people” or make racist jokes, she believes that there should be more scope for people to express themselves.
“What I don’t want to see happen is because people are frightened of an over-reaction they don’t raise the issue,” she said. “What I don’t want people to say is that Muslims will be offended by Christmas, because they are not. There is this presumption that we don’t do things because people will be offended.““ (Source)
So she doesn’t want people to offend but then doesn’t want the fall-out which a consistent and forced avoidance of offence necessarily entails.

Internet Regulation: Think of the Children!

New Labour seems to be serious about starting to regulate the net more generally rather than in specific cases where real or imagined criminal activity is an issue. The latest idea is an enforced age labelling of websites. As usual, a need to protect the children is at the forefront of justifying government interference. For once, I think the welfare of our children is a genuinely relevant issue, though not in the way that the government has in mind.

The age rating proposed may not sound much like an exercise in censorship

An End to Censorship in Canada?

If Ezra Levant’s blog is anything to go by, the days of ‘section 13’, which allows Canada’s human rights commissions to act as censors, should be numbered. The only downside is that Levant’s supply of eloquent statements in defence of free speech may dry up. In anticipation of this, here is another gem (from the Michael Coren show):

The Tyranny of Nice

For those who haven’t followed the Ezra Levant / Mark Steyn saga, this short book may be a revelation, to others a useful reference. Pete Vere and Kathy Shaidle have detailed the role of Canada’s Human Rights Commissions in suppressing free speech, covering the case against Ezra Levant, for daring to re-print the Muhammad cartoons in the Western Standard and against MacLeans for printing excerpts of Mark Steyn’s “America Alone”. They also mention the prosecutions (successful in one case) against Christian anti-gay activists for publicly voicing their dislike of homosexuality and a number of less well known cases, such as the one in which a Barkeeper was required to allow patrons to smoke Marijuana on the premises on human rights grounds while simultaneously being barred from doing so

Regulating the web?

New Labour’s Barbara Follett is quoted in the Guardian as saying that the internet needs to be regulated “the sooner the better”. She wants an ‘age identification card’ for online access and pre-screening of user generated contents uploads. Don’t expect things to stop there. Once the mode of delivery is regulated in a way to facilitate official oversight, expect directive regulation of contents

What will Obama’s Presidency mean for free speech?

Many have predicted a change for the worse if Obama becomes president. Some concrete fears are raised in this article, which expects that Obama will re-introduce contents restrictions on radio broadcasts, thus effectively limiting the scope for conservative talk-radio. (More)

Dutch Blasphemy Laws

It seems that the UK is not the only European Country aiming to strengthen religious censorship: Dutch censorship laws appear surprisingly hard to defeat. The numerous existing censorship provisions existing elsewhere in the west have been discussed here before. Canada is a particularly bad case (see Ezra Levant’s blog for almost daily updates!)

The Jewel of Medina – much ado about nothing

Sherry Jones’ novel The Jewel of Medina has attracted plenty of attention prior to publication, mainly due to the self censorship of the original publisher and an actual fire bomb attack on its successor. (The Pub Philosopher has chronicled these events.) Generally speaking, if somebody tries to censor a book, I normally want to read it; but in this case, I need not have bothered.

Denise Spellberg argued the book was soft core pornography

New(ish) Blogs

The Institute of Economic Affairs (iea) started its own blog last month. Feminists Against Censorship have also started blogging while ago. They don’t post very often, but have been among the few following the censorship provision in the “Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008″.

Mark Thompson, Islam and the BBC

The BBC’s Mark Thompson, according to the telegraph, argued in a lecture to Theos that Muslims should be treated more sensitively than Christians because they “… are a religious minority in Britain and also often from ethnic minorities…”.

These comments, of course were promptly played down by the BBC: “A BBC spokesman said Mr Thompson did not mean Islam should be given preferential treatment, just that all religions are different. He said: “People should look at his actual comments rather than trying to infer additional meaning that isn’t there.” (Source)

Looking at his actual comments is not so easy