Yesterday I put up a post about the BBC claiming copyright infringement to have pro Scottish Independence YouTube channels taken down.
They’ve rowed back in a hurry and are in damage control after getting a right good skelping from across a range of media outlets – everyone from the Tax Research UK peeps (no idea who or what they are) pertinently headlining with “Does the BBC have the right to close down discussion on the news” to The Canary echoing astonishment with “Eyes widen as the BBC closes down YouTube channel of the biggest pro-indy campaigner”, and on across The Scotsman, Glasgow Herald, National, Sun and other more mainstream outlets.
The best bit?
It seems like no-one in the BBC HQ in London bothered to consult with anyone within BBC Scotland about the likely reaction to heavy handed censorship that was never likely to be seen as anything other than the exercise of political bias.
This link contains a BBC Radio Scotland interview where BBC spokepeople are trying to put a brave face on a nasty fiasco. It’s worth the listen. This second link covers the fact that YouTube have re-instated the channel and links to all the stories and headlines from the outlets mentioned above. Some mainstream outlets may be rather conspicuous in their absence. And given we’re talking about a state broadcaster seeking to shut down political dialogue, that might be a worry.
I’m going to repeat a suggestion from yesterdays post – when we “give an inch”; when we think it’s okay to shut down or censor some free speech or some political opinions, or some people, simply on the on the basis that they aren’t nice, or are disagreeable, or are confusing, we’re not on a good path – we’re creating an atmosphere or environment that can enables or embolden some to “take a mile”. And that doesn’t end well.