#censorshipagenda follow up article

Follow up to the recent article:

Why are MPs encouraging people who appear to have been the victims of crime to campaign for a new laws?

An early example of this is the Leveson Enquiry about phone hacking, which was already illegal:

Leveson Inquiry: Ian Hislop says new press laws not needed
New laws are not needed to govern the press, Private Eye editor Ian Hislop has told an inquiry into media ethics. Practices such as phone hacking, paying police officers and being in contempt of court contravene existing laws, Mr Hislop told the Leveson Inquiry. He said the inquiry should examine why the laws were not rigorously enforced

Another example is this case here, which again has MPs campaigning for changes to the way the world works, when in fact there doesn't seem to be a need for that:

Caroline Criado-Perez Twitter abuse case leads to arrest
A 21-year-old man has been arrested after a feminist campaigner was deluged on Twitter with abuse and threats of rape, Scotland Yard has confirmed.
He was detained in the Manchester area on suspicion of harassment offences.
Caroline Criado-Perez faced abuse after successfully campaigning for a woman's face to appear on UK banknotes.
Twitter says it plans to introduce a "report abuse" button on its website, but Labour has called its response to the latest case "inadequate".
Freedom of speech does not allow you to make specific threats. If someone sent you a death threat in the post you'd not want the post office closed down. You'd want the person arrested.

Why are MPs encouraging people to think the internet is anonymous when it's not?

Why are so many groups who openly advocate censorship getting so much media coverage at the moment?

This post is a follow up to the recent article: http://margerrisons.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/censorshipagenda.html


Popular Posts