The good news just keeps rolling in.
The dominant news is of course the end of our financial sovereignty. We are now beholden to Europe and have to accept that we are bold children and all our work has to be inspected and passed by teacher before we can submit it.
Be that as it may, I have learned of another lovely snippet of news.
Censorship is now alive and well in the media.
The Irish Examiner has stated [and I quote] –
“John, the editor says there is no way he going to allow his paper to
be used in any way as a vehicle for a lobby – funded or not – that
condones or promotes the consumption of a hazardous subject – legal
or not. “
This of course refers to letters about smoking. The editor is quite willing to give a platform for any halfwit or crank that wants to express their views about the evils of the pernicious weed but does not allow any counter arguments. So if I write to The Examiner and casually mention that I enjoy a puff on the pipe, I am instantly labelled as a vehicle and am banned.
I always thought freedom of speech meant that anything was accepted provided it was not libellous, was accurate and was relevant. I have views that a lot of people would find repugnant, and I not only defend my right to air those views but also defend the right of people to oppose them. I have never moderated views on this site provided they fit the criteria. I recently stopped a couple of comments about Roisin Ingle, because they were a tirade of abuse against the woman, and while I may agree with some of the sentiments expressed, I refused to publish. There have been comments that were directed against me, and that is fine. I always publish them.
The Examiner is a national newspaper, not a parochial rag. It has a duty to perform and part of that duty is to allow free speech without any bias from the editor. Yet here we have an editor censoring views purely because he disagrees with them.
I would love to know if The Examiner is going to refuse advertising from the drinks trade. Is there to be no mention of cars in the small ads? Either the editor should wholly endorse the Nanny State or he should back off.