-
Sorry, but your argument is starting to sound like that of an idealistic teenager who believes in absolute freedoms. The geopolitical reality of the situation is far more complex. Unbridled freedom of speech is all well and good, but it makes for fractious environment.
Don't get me wrong - I'm not trying to suggest your idealism is born out of naivety, just that in an uncensored world nothing would ever get done, on the basis that consensus just isn't feasible.
The_Kindness_of_Trees-
I think only pro censorship advocates should be censored.
-
Utter rubbish. I work in a senior role for one of the world's largest news agencies so I am fully aware of the geopolitics. It's not idealism, it is the current reality. Which you may not like, but that's how it is.
There is a consensus, here and now. It's utterly feasible because it already exists. The media has to follow rules set out by society (statutory rules - i.e. the law) and voluntary codes (IPSO in the UK), which might not mean much to some outlets but we adhere to rigorously.
People going around murdering journalists who are merely exercising their right to freedom of expression makes for a fractious environment, not journalists reporting the news.
dancing james
Fox
Absolutely. Censorship is absolutely a bad thing per se. What Voltaire said. If you don't understand the critical importance of media scrutiny - uncensored and with full freedom of the press - to effective democracy and civil society ain't nobody got time for that conversation.