Film, Media & TV0 min ago
Liverpool Council And The Boycott Of The Sun
34 Answers
http://
legitimate and necessary protest? or a move bordering on politically sanctioned censorship?
legitimate and necessary protest? or a move bordering on politically sanctioned censorship?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by mushroom25. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Personally I think the council is wrong to get involved.
If retailers and the general public want to not buy or sell it then that is for them to decide but a political entity, such as council, should not interfere.
How dare they say that because new newsagent shops and new owners are springing up and are selling the Sun paper and it wasn't being questioned. What is this? Nazi England? The thought police are alive and going strong in Liverpool these days then.
One poor bloke has been forced to cancel his paper for fear for the paperboy (and probably himself if truth be known).
This arrogance that says people are not allowed to move on. The abject self importance of those that demand a hole city follow its rule in such a way is absolutely unacceptable.
If retailers and the general public want to not buy or sell it then that is for them to decide but a political entity, such as council, should not interfere.
How dare they say that because new newsagent shops and new owners are springing up and are selling the Sun paper and it wasn't being questioned. What is this? Nazi England? The thought police are alive and going strong in Liverpool these days then.
One poor bloke has been forced to cancel his paper for fear for the paperboy (and probably himself if truth be known).
This arrogance that says people are not allowed to move on. The abject self importance of those that demand a hole city follow its rule in such a way is absolutely unacceptable.
Liverpool will NEVER forgive The Sun for its biased reporting of the Hillsborough tragedy. It was The Sun that ran the false story of Liverpool fans urinating from the terrace onto the police and ambulance crews as they tried to help the injured. It is widely accepted that The Sun ran the story at the request of the government to shift blame away from the police.
It is clearly not the council's area of responsibility to be telling folk which popular newspapers they should sell. It's not what the citizens pay them to do. Councils are supposed to get street lights running at night, and weekly bin collections made. I think this sort of interference ought to be reportable somewhere, and wrists get slapped as a result.
1. Not censorship. It is a toothless pronouncement with no regulatory backing to enforce it.
2. Only 27 years too late.
3. From my experience of Liverpool, a copy of the Sun is rarer than than rocking horse ***, any way. Many newsagents and customers already boycott it.
4. A stupid and popularist move by a party pandering to the masses.
5. The right wing press are desperate for anything to demonstrate the trots are back in the Labour Party. This ticks those boxes even if it is nothing to do with left wing politics.
2. Only 27 years too late.
3. From my experience of Liverpool, a copy of the Sun is rarer than than rocking horse ***, any way. Many newsagents and customers already boycott it.
4. A stupid and popularist move by a party pandering to the masses.
5. The right wing press are desperate for anything to demonstrate the trots are back in the Labour Party. This ticks those boxes even if it is nothing to do with left wing politics.
It doesn't border on politically sanctioned censorship, it crosses it, and it is fundamentally wrong.
The notion does smack of both tokenism and political opportunism, but to use what is not even in effect, but actual censorship of a national newspaper is wholly unacceptable.
As others have advised, the people of Liverpool have the right to choose their paper, as does everyone in a free society, and in the main, they choose to boycott The Sun, and have done so for many years.
The Council's action amounts to the schoolyard bully being knocked over by the picked-on kid, and then another pupil hooting from the side lines that he thinks it's a good thing as well.
Pointless, and unedifying for the Council who should be spending their time on more important issues than pandering after the event.
The notion does smack of both tokenism and political opportunism, but to use what is not even in effect, but actual censorship of a national newspaper is wholly unacceptable.
As others have advised, the people of Liverpool have the right to choose their paper, as does everyone in a free society, and in the main, they choose to boycott The Sun, and have done so for many years.
The Council's action amounts to the schoolyard bully being knocked over by the picked-on kid, and then another pupil hooting from the side lines that he thinks it's a good thing as well.
Pointless, and unedifying for the Council who should be spending their time on more important issues than pandering after the event.
ichkeria - //I don't think censorship comes into it. //
I entirely disagree.
Even though the council's mandate has no legal backing, the fact that it would indulge itself in debating the rights and wrongs of censoring free media access - and that is what this is - is a worrying step down a very slippery slope.
The council should not be allowed to think that debating this is OK, regardless of their inability to enforce it.
Every bad decision made starts with a bad thought.
I entirely disagree.
Even though the council's mandate has no legal backing, the fact that it would indulge itself in debating the rights and wrongs of censoring free media access - and that is what this is - is a worrying step down a very slippery slope.
The council should not be allowed to think that debating this is OK, regardless of their inability to enforce it.
Every bad decision made starts with a bad thought.
What percentage of Liverpool's inhabitants were not born and bred there?
People choose the most popular daily for any amount of reasons - sport,crosswords,horoscopes,etc.
As the article states,we are meant to be residing in a free society and not being dictated to by councillor's.
Is it getting to the stage where we can't speak,write and READ what we want?
Surely,there are more 'pressing' matters to be getting on with?
We'll all 'never walk alone' before long..
People choose the most popular daily for any amount of reasons - sport,crosswords,horoscopes,etc.
As the article states,we are meant to be residing in a free society and not being dictated to by councillor's.
Is it getting to the stage where we can't speak,write and READ what we want?
Surely,there are more 'pressing' matters to be getting on with?
We'll all 'never walk alone' before long..
TTT - //Not sure what role the council is playing here. If no one buys it then it won't be stocked. By backing the boycott they just saying they agree with people not buying it. They are not banning it, just a bit of politicking. //
I think the issue is, the council should not be playing any role at all!
If people use their free choice to boycott a paper, that is fine, but that is not the same as a council which speaks for its electorate riding in and supporting a social choice as thought it is mandated and backed - clearly it is not, and the council would be better steering clear of such potentially difficult areas.
I think the issue is, the council should not be playing any role at all!
If people use their free choice to boycott a paper, that is fine, but that is not the same as a council which speaks for its electorate riding in and supporting a social choice as thought it is mandated and backed - clearly it is not, and the council would be better steering clear of such potentially difficult areas.
-- answer removed --
ichkeria - //Tora's right surely Andy? Just a bit of gesture politics. No one is any less free to buy or read the Sun than previously, as I understand it //
Tora is indeed right about the point that the council have no actual power here.
My issue is them even taking a minute to consider this as something that is their business a council, when clearly it is not.
At best it's time-wasting, at worst, it's giving consideration to council-approved censorship - neither are appropriate.
Tora is indeed right about the point that the council have no actual power here.
My issue is them even taking a minute to consider this as something that is their business a council, when clearly it is not.
At best it's time-wasting, at worst, it's giving consideration to council-approved censorship - neither are appropriate.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.