If you register for free, you will be able to post threads, vote on polls and lots more. If you have problems with the registration or logging in, please contact the administrator.
The Right to Freedom of Expression *A slight spin-off*
A slight spin-off from Yesterday's thread about a Journalist maintaining they had the right to Freedom of Information, despite a court order banning a defendant from being named.
Was in my media laws/ethics class today and the subject of political censorship (as well as general censorship) came up. The tutor mentioned about how the Pro-life Alliance ran a party political broadcast on the BBC in 1997, regarding the issue of abortion.
The political broadcast was shown, but was censored and ended at around the 1 minute 30 second mark by the BBC, on the grounds of public decency.
The Pro-life Alliance group then complained to the BBC, arguing that the corporation was denying the party freedom of expression, by not showing what it called the "true story" of abortion, thus undermining the whole issue they were trying to put across - namely that people should vote for the party as a way of showing that they were against abortion.
The uncensored/banned political broadcast is now up on Youtube here. It must be said that before anyone watches the video, it's extremely graphic, and definitely not for those who are in any way squeamish.
I know there's a few politically-minded people on here, and abortion has probably affected quite a few people on here at some point in their lives. However, I'm interested in seeing what other peoples view's are:
A) To the video itself
B) To the BBC's decision to censor the video at the point it did (it's pretty obvious at which point they ended the campaign video)
C) To the Pro-life Alliance's argument that it shouldn't have been censored/banned
10-30-2007, 09:36 PM
The Right to Freedom of Expression *A slight spin-off* Post #2
A) To the video itself
B) To the BBC's decision to censor the video at the point it did (it's pretty obvious at which point they ended the campaign video)
C) To the Pro-life Alliance's argument that it shouldn't have been censored/banned
A) I always felt that abortion was right up to a certain point, and nothing would make me change those views, but after seeing this video and actually seeing the size of some of these babies and how alive the could have been, it makes me think that something has to be done about this and pregnancies shouldn't be aborted after a certain stage (that's a different debate, however).
B) I think that the video is incredibly graphic after the point it was censored, so rightly censored, I feel that people should have a right to watch the video if they so wish, and the BBC could have done something about that, whether it be by putting it on their website or whatever, but it affected me in such a way, so I feel it would affect other people strongly as well.
C) As above really, the video would have recieved many complains, I feel, for being so graphic, and if younger children had seen it, it may have scared them. Many different arguments to this, but I feel it was rightly censored, but the full version should have been available if people wanted to watch it.
10-30-2007, 10:00 PM
The Right to Freedom of Expression *A slight spin-off* Post #4
I didn't see anything wrong with that video. Gruesome toward the end, yes, but so can video of news events in the world.
Television broadcasters are usually in a tight spot given the heavy hand of government. Hell, our government thinks I'm still traumatized by Janet Jackson's nipple flash. So in that respect, I can see why the BBC would feel the need to censor the video at the point it did.
It's a tricky balancing act. On the one hand the airwaves are considered to be public property (albeit one regulated and divided by the government) and therefore should be as open a forum as debating with people on a street corner. On the other hand, you're using a company's private property to get your message out.
Given the BBC's status as a public broadcaster though, I think they should have shown the whole video.
10-30-2007, 11:52 PM
The Right to Freedom of Expression *A slight spin-off* Post #8
Originally posted by birdy123:
And just to clarify, I am not saying that abortion is wrong, I am just saying that the video has made me think a bit more about my decisions.
That's a good point, if it can have that effect just on one person. If x million people had seen that, it could of created a pretty big debate.
It's truly horrific in places though...
10-31-2007, 01:28 AM
The Right to Freedom of Expression *A slight spin-off* Post #9
Originally posted by Jason the Yank:
I didn't see anything wrong with that video. Gruesome toward the end, yes, but so can video of news events in the world.
Television broadcasters are usually in a tight spot given the heavy hand of government. Hell, our government thinks I'm still traumatized by Janet Jackson's nipple flash. So in that respect, I can see why the BBC would feel the need to censor the video at the point it did.
It's a tricky balancing act. On the one hand the airwaves are considered to be public property (albeit one regulated and divided by the government) and therefore should be as open a forum as debating with people on a street corner. On the other hand, you're using a company's private property to get your message out.
Given the BBC's status as a public broadcaster though, I think they should have shown the whole video.
Party Political Broadcasts are a totally different kettle of fish though, I'm sure there's a whole set of legislation as to what can go into them and what can't, not to mention the general guidelines on what they can show, which is decided by OFCOM (may not have existed then), and not the BBC, but there's loads of things they cannot show unfortunately, ofc there's the watershed rules too and whether the broadcast was pre-9pm (I doubt it, as most small parties only seem to get them post watershed), I don't know.
10-31-2007, 01:32 AM
The Right to Freedom of Expression *A slight spin-off* Post #10
How would the pro-lifers feel of the pro-abortion lobby showed an advert showing the negative repercussions of them forcing women to have babies they don't want? Maybe start with a young girl being raped, living on a council estate and then how **** how life is. Then said baby turning into a scumbag twocker. Shocking but hey.
The Right to Freedom of Expression *A slight spin-off* 
Linear Mode
