It looks like free speech in the UK is now on the slippery slope.

[Estro Felino]

I know You Tube removed the channel of a Canadian guy who had so many videos about Europe, Brexit...etc...
I also helped them by translating some videos from Italian into English.


YT clearly removed that channel because of the rightwing content

 

[Shad]

From Reuters:



Britain to make social media platforms responsible for harmful content

Slippery slope? Better or worse than the American NSA listening in on our free speech in the privacy of our property?

Worse as it is using a corporation to enforce speech laws and holding it responsible for the users own actions instead of merely a government entity abusing due process and violating the constitution which can be challenged.

 

[England my lionheart]

It is far more concerning when governments get involved with what can be said on the internet.

I get that,"big brothers watching you" but what else is the answer?.

 

[Notanumber]

Why are British police investigating non-crimes when there are plenty of actual crimes to keep them in overdrive?

This time the courts have made a sensible decision.

Index welcomes ruling that police reaction to tweets was "disproportionate interference"

I hope this leads to a more open culture and makes the government reconsider its draconian proposals.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Worse as it is using a corporation to enforce speech laws and holding it responsible for the users own actions instead of merely a government entity abusing due process and violating the constitution which can be challenged.

Hm...your description makes the latter sound worse to me.

It seems like both are attempts to thwart criminal activity, but the UK example only violates rights in the form of forcing a private business to police the users of their product, which I suppose could be likened to the rules governing attendance at a public space like a concert. The American example feels more invasive: The government has records and access to personal material and property, even in the private sphere of our homes.

 

[Notanumber]

I get that,"big brothers watching you" but what else is the answer?.

If only they were just watching instead of ruining people’s lives over non-crime comments.

 

[GoodbyeDave]

Are you a communist?

No. I voted Conservative in the last election.

If not, then you should make protection of free speech your business.

That's a non sequitur, if ever there was one! The fact that I'm not a communist doesn't mean that I have to support libel or incitement to treason, both of which are illegal in all states as far as I know. It doesn't mean that I have to support hate speech, which is illegal in most civilised countries. "Non-communist" doesn't equate to admirer of Ayn Rand.

And I notice that you didn't answer my question.

 

[Estro Felino]

. It doesn't mean that I have to support hate speech,

Well...but apparently someone stated that being a Nativist is equivalent to hate speech.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I know You Tube removed the channel of a Canadian guy who had so many videos about Europe, Brexit...etc...
I also helped them by translating some videos from Italian into English.


YT clearly removed that channel because of the rightwing content

That batty CEO of theirs is going to run that place into the ground.

 

[Notanumber]

No. I voted Conservative in the last election.

If not, then you should make protection of free speech your business.[/QUOTE]
That's a non sequitur, if ever there was one! The fact that I'm not a communist doesn't mean that I have to support libel or incitement to treason, both of which are illegal in all states as far as I know. It doesn't mean that I have to support hate speech, which is illegal in most civilised countries. "Non-communist" doesn't equate to admirer of Ayn Rand.

And I notice that you didn't answer my question.[/QUOTE]

The issue of free speech is bigger than Britain.

Communists cannot stand free speech.

 

[oldbadger]

UK has no idea how to handle harmful content. That's bad for free speech

Rubbish.
The UK is a leader of and for free speech.

Unless you have clear examples?

 

[oldbadger]

The problem is you're going to cloister people over the course of time to the realities that surround us using insulating policies. Not to mention the abuse that can come from that through the use of falsified propaganda.

Let's use the extreme example of the people in North Korea. They will not be prepared if the s*** ever hits the fan. The shock will do a lot more harm imo.

Law and order, and moderation of all media and communication is a no brainer.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

There never has been and never will be totally free speech anywhere.
Where countries set the limits varies enormously.
This never has been a question of left or right
Or communism or capitalism.
Even in the USA and it's constitunal right to free speech sets many limits.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Law and order, and moderation of all media and communication is a no brainer.

True. Yet we see time and time again with people going overboard with knee-jerk prosecution which begs the question of who is making these decisions of what crosses the line.

Michigan lawmakers defend U.P. college student charged over Snapchat gun photo

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

True. Yet we see time and time again with people going overboard with knee-jerk prosecution which begs the question of who is making these decisions of what crosses the line.

Michigan lawmakers defend U.P. college student charged over Snapchat gun photo

In most countries it is people making complaints to the police.
They then investigate and provide evidence to a prosecution service.
This then decides if there is sufficient evidence to bring the case to court.
Guilt or innocence Is decided by a jury.
A judge establishes a suitable sentence. If guilty.

 

[Notanumber]

Rubbish.
The UK is a leader of and for free speech.

Unless you have clear examples?

How long will Mr Justice Knowles keep his position after he ruled against the police forces across the country on how they record "non-crime hate incidents"?

https://www.faircop.org.uk/

Challenging Thought Crime: HarryTheOwl v The College of Policing

 

[Estro Felino]

There never has been and never will be totally free speech anywhere.

Yes...there is

 

[oldbadger]

True. Yet we see time and time again with people going overboard with knee-jerk prosecution which begs the question of who is making these decisions of what crosses the line.

Michigan lawmakers defend U.P. college student charged over Snapchat gun photo

This thread is about the UK, though.

And I'm guessing that no Michigan lawmakers defended a student. Lawmakers legislate, and defence lawyers defend. Maybe Judges can be seen to defend in their judgements, but it's about correct titles for different folks.

 

[oldbadger]

How long will Mr Justice Knowles keep his position after he ruled against the police forces across the country on how they record "non-crime hate incidents"?

He was right.
There should be no recording of 'Non-Crime incidents.
There should be no recording in the UK of arrests.

There should only be Criminal Records of Warnings, Cautions and Convictions. And Judge Knowles did not rule against police forces 'across the country', he judged one situation.

You seem to turn incidents in to fake news, the way you write.

 

[Notanumber]

He was right.
There should be no recording of 'Non-Crime incidents.
There should be no recording in the UK of arrests.

There should only be Criminal Records of Warnings, Cautions and Convictions. And Judge Knowles did not rule against police forces 'across the country', he judged one situation.

You seem to turn incidents in to fake news, the way you write.

I know Mr Justice Knowles was right but I fear that he is a lone voice or at least one of the very few prepared to stand up against the PC culture in the College of Policing.

It seems that he is one of the few that has not so far been infected by Common Purpose and I applaud him.