[The Sabbaticus]

[youtube]nRTZiKWs2pc[/youtube]

At 0:27

The British are a lost cause. Truly the Madhouse of Europe. I hear you can't even order 'black coffee' any more in the lunch cafeteria for municipal buildings in the UK, lest you offend people with a certain melanin quotient. You'll need to order 'coffee without milk'.

In this case, it was an editorial decision, but the censorship laws in the UK are nearing Chinese status, with actual thought control police patrolling the internet.

[layman]

The Guardian did print the image in one of its editorials.

Far too few did though.

[JRS1]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2106953/Christianity-gets-sensitive-treatment-religions-admits-BBC-chief.html

Here is the logic behind it all. Terribly confused logic.

[Potemkin]

The internal contradictions of bourgeois liberalism are clearly reaching crisis point....

[Prosthetic Conscience]

The BBC did show the cover:

And the BBC, which has come in for criticism in the past for not showing the Danish cartoons of Mohammed published by Danish magazine Jyllands-Posten, showed Charlie Hebdo's Mohammed covers on several occasions, most notably on Newsnight when it was held up for the camera by presenter Evan Davis.

Other cartoons depicting Mohammed had also featured in BBC News coverage and on Panorama.

"The BBC is a news organisation committed both to free speech and respecting our audiences in the UK and around the world," said a BBC spokeswoman.

"We have made the editorial judgment that the images are central to reporting the story and will continue to report the story in a careful and considered manner."

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/charlie-hebdo- ... nd-1483233

Your complaint about British censorship laws (as opposed to Sky's own decision) needs backing up with an example, not a made-up rumour about black coffee.

[Noelnada]

Sorry but interviewing Caroline Fourest is the biggest offense to journalism here

[The Sabbaticus]

Your complaint about British censorship laws (as opposed to Sky's own decision) needs backing up with an example, not a made-up rumour about black coffee.

Only 2 UK Dailies Published The New Charlie Hebdo Cover

Stefano Pozzebon

Jan. 13, 2015, 11:34 AM
2,331
3

Despite unanimous support for the French magazine Charlie Hebdo, which was the victim of an Islamic terrorist attack that killed 12 people at its offices last Wednesday, many British newspapers have chosen not to publish the front page of the new issue, which again depicts the Prophet Muhammad.

Charlie Hebdo will print Wednesday with a cartoon portraying Muhammad holding a sign that says "Je Suis Charlie," the popular slogan that expresses support for the magazine. Above Muhammad's head are the words "Tout est pardonné," meaning "all is forgiven."

Some Muslims consider it offensive to depict Muhammad in any format, and Charlie Hebdo has a long story of cartoons featuring the Prophet.

But after calling the attack a "war on freedom" last week, only two British national newspapers published the new cartoon Tuesday, which was released Monday night by Libération, another French newspaper, which is hosting Charlie Hebdo's surviving editorial team in its offices.

The Guardian online edition published a small thumbnail of the new cover halfway through its article, after a bold disclaimer that reads: "Warning: this article contains the image of the magazine cover, which some may find offensive."

The Independent does pretty much the same, publishing a thumbnail toward the end of the article with the warning, "An image in this article may offend some readers."

The Daily Mirror is not publishing the cartoon at all, while The Telegraph is publishing the headline, "Tout est pardonné," but not the image of Muhammad.

The Times chose not to publish the cartoon either, sparking angry reactions from its readers, who do not seem to appreciate the decision. One reader wrote in the comment section: "Our fathers and grandfathers fought and gave their lives for free speech in this country, they would be ashamed of The Times today as I am."

Another reader has announced he will "decline to renew his subscription," while a third simply confesses he has just gone to The Guardian to see the cartoon.

The Daily Mail made a similar choice, which triggered similar reactions: "Show the cover then you cowards," one reader wrote.

The BBC is not showing the cover either (except on Newsnight), but BuzzFeed put it right at the top of its coverage.

Business Insider decided to publish the cartoon (here), given the general interest in the news. We're hoping that people with devout religious beliefs understand that this is not a provocation, and can respect the freedom of the press during this crisis.

Business Insider

Looks to me that isn't quite the case in the UK. As for crypto-censorship laws, you'll have to contend yourself with what you already know about the current statutes, in addition to the above. And the 'twitter police' is a real phenomenon in the UK.

[ThereBeDragons]

Man, who cares? Suppose a magazine editor got shot for publishing a picture of a shocking and graphic sexual act. Does that mean that the next day that we should be seeing the picture plastered on the front page of every newspaper and airing nonstop on every news channel?

Just because someone (many someones) got shot over doesn't mean you have to repost it.

[The Sabbaticus]

This is a clash of ideologies, and as such, an ideological response is required. The same can't be said for your example.

[Prosthetic Conscience]

I hear you can't even order 'black coffee' any more in the lunch cafeteria for municipal buildings in the UK, lest you offend people with a certain melanin quotient. You'll need to order 'coffee without milk'.

Then I presume that was either a joke, or you're dropping this as a silly made-up claim.

In this case, it was an editorial decision, but the censorship laws in the UK are nearing Chinese status, with actual thought control police patrolling the internet.

And you've now given more examples of editorial decisions. Cameron's desire to stop the use of encryption that government can't break is draconian, but it hasn't happened yet, and will probably be unworkable even if he gets back in with a majority willing to back that (unlikely).

Did you know, in the 90s, the USA banned the sale of strong encryption products by American companies outside the USA? From 2000:

Although cryptography is studied at universities around the world, and encryption products have been readily available from foreign vendors for years, the U.S. government maintained strict controls on the export of encryption products for national security and law enforcement reasons. The computer industry has long argued that restricting exports of mass-market software programs with encryption capabilities is ineffective and harms U.S. competitiveness in worldwide markets. But successive Administrations have largely rejected these arguments. Incremental changes to the U.S. export controls over the last several years initially sought to encourage market acceptance of products that allow for government access to encryption keys or the plain text of encrypted data by relaxing export controls on such products. Only in the last two years has the U.S. policy moved toward allowing the broad exportability of most encryption products, but complex rules surrounding such exports remain.

http://encryption_policies.tripod.com/u ... ftware.htm

[The Sabbaticus]

'Claim?'

The phrasing should indicate otherwise. As for the source, it's Dutch, and the author has it from her English husband. But it's a nice little anecdote to capture the insanity that is currently gripping British society. Incidentally, it's one of many more found in British newspapers.

And you've now given more examples of editorial decisions. Cameron's desire to stop the use of encryption that government can't break is draconian, but it hasn't happened yet, and will probably be unworkable even if he gets back in with a majority willing to back that (unlikely).

It's called 'noticing a trend'. It also fittingly relegates your protestations to the rubbish bin.

The BBC is not showing the cover either (except on Newsnight), but BuzzFeed put it right at the top of its coverage.

As for your references to 'encryption'. The British government outsourced its Great Wall Of The UK (on the internet) to Chinese censorship companies (the hilarity) only a couple of years ago. This comes with a recent censorship move into the realm of pornographic content. With a bevy of waves still rolling from the various 'Hate Speech' acts, notably in favour of Islamic minorities. And you really think that reviving a 'Snooper act' isn't something to be alarmed about?

[skinster]

I hear you can't even order 'black coffee' any more in the lunch cafeteria for municipal buildings in the UK, lest you offend people with a certain melanin quotient. You'll need to order 'coffee without milk'.

Don't believe everything you hear, Sab. You might be like this guy who became the laughing stock of Birmingham and beyond.