May 20, 2009

If we believe in freedom of speech we must allow the BNP to advertise

I cannot share the National Union of Journalists' sense of outrage about newspapers accepting adverts from the British National Party. The BNP may advocate disgustingly racist policies, but it is a legally constituted party.

Journalists should support freedom of expression and accept that it means reading and hearing material that they find offensive. Better that we do that than play into the BNP's hands by censoring it.

Think about it for a moment. If a liberal society is prepared to stifle freedom of speech then it provides fascist parties with a justification for their illiberal policies. So I am relaxed about the decision by Newsquest to run BNP ads on the websites of several of its papers and would urge the NUJ to stop making a silly fuss about the issue.

A statement by Newsquest in Stourbridge pointed out that to refuse such ads "might be playing into the hands of those intolerant and anti-democratic forces that people condemn. It is for the electorate to cast judgment, not us."

According to the Media Guardian story, a number of video and banner ads appeared on the websites of titles such as the Bromsgrove Advertiser, Redditch Advertiser and Stourbridge News. It was initially thought that the ads had been removed, but Jon Slattery reported this morning that he had found them again. They proclaim: "British jobs for British workers".

A holdthefrontpage story also mentions the placing of online banner ads in the Basildon-based daily, The Echo. I could not locate them this morning, but Slattery later found small "Vote BNP" ads on the both the Echo site and that of the Colchester Gazette.

Newsquest has made out coherent arguments for running the ads. Note, for instance, the views of Martin McNeil, editorial director of Newsquest Essex, expressed to a complaining reader (and posted on the anti-fascist Lancaster Unity website).
"Thanks for your email regarding BNP advertising. We are accepting paid-for advertising from any political parties or candidates standing in the current elections.

"I appreciate how strongly many people feel about the BNP, but it would be undemocratic and against the principle of free speech to refuse to accept any party's advertising provided it falls within our guidelines.

"The Echo has consistently opposed the BNP in our comment column and will continue to do so. As editor, I have twice been taken to court, unsuccessfully, by a BNP activist who did not like my editorial stance. I also regularly receive BNP hate mail.

"Despite this, I feel I must defend the right of all parties to take out paid-for advertising is support of their election candidates."
That seems to me like a perfectly reasonable justification. Due to Newsquest's anti-journalistic custom of not speaking to the press, I couldn't cast any light on why the ads seemed to have been removed for a time.

No-one was prepared to deal with my query when I called its headquarters this morning. I was told: "The only man who can speak about this is the chief executive, Paul Davidson, and he's away until the middle of next week."

McNeil was also unavailable when I called him in Basildon.

Media Guardian

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

This argument has been done to death and it still doesn't stack up. Nobody has the freedom to cause harm or distress to another person - in doing so we curtail the other person's freedom.

The BNP's policies would cause harm and distress to others on account of mere skin colour. By defending the BNP's "freedom" we deny freedom to its potential victims.

Barbara Suzuki said...

Newspapers are free to accept whatever advertsements they please within their code of practice, and members of the public are just as free to protest if they find the adverts objectionable in any way.
If there are enough complaints about certain advertising material then the newspapers have to weigh up whether they are worth so much negative publicity and public disdain, and they have to consider seriously whether their organ is being contaminated by such contempt.
Simples!

Anonymous said...

Here, here.

At last a voice of sanity from the left. If the BNP are to be defeated it must be done by reasoned argument - not intimidation, threats and violence.

To use those methods only makes the left look hysterical and hypocritical.

Pete Green said...

Great to see Lancaster Unity getting a mention in the national Guardian. You're getting a lot of cred out there and well-deserved it is too.

JB said...

I don't actually agree with this article at all and the reason is summed up in a sentence from it.

"The BNP may advocate disgustingly racist policies, but it is a legally constituted party."

Well, it bloody shouldn't be. Fuck being liberal, if the BNP is racist and has racist policies, which it is and does, there's no way it should be granted any kind of legitimate status.

Anonymous said...

Take it from one who knows, you "play into the BNP's hands" by treating it as though it were a normal political party.

Antifascist said...

'Great to see Lancaster Unity getting a mention in the national Guardian. You're getting a lot of cred out there and well-deserved it is too.'

Aw shucks. Thanks, Pete. :-)

'Fuck being liberal, if the BNP is racist and has racist policies, which it is and does, there's no way it should be granted any kind of legitimate status.'

I have to say I agree with that entirely.

Anonymous said...

hey ozzwanker i believe the nf are eyeing your house up this weekend haha

Anonymous said...

"hey ozzwanker i believe the nf are eyeing your house up this weekend haha"

Of course they are.

Rah said...

Anonymous said...
hey ozzwanker i believe the nf are eyeing your house up this weekend haha


Their mummy said 'Only if they do the dishes' So you see it's not certain...

Still doing a fantastic job K!

Green Gordon said...

How difficult could it be for a law to be passed that Political Parties may not discriminate on who they allow to be members based on skin colour, ethnicity, religion, etc?

irishtony said...

"hey ozzwanker i believe the nf are eyeing your house up this weekend haha"

And there I was thinking this site suffered from a shortage of great thinkers and intellectuals !!!

God help the BNP

Nay_Fash said...

We don't extend the right to free speech to paedophiles, and Nazis are much more dangerous than paedophiles.

Anonymous said...

JB, who do you think would most likely suffer if racism were to be given no non-violent political outlet? Not white anti-fascists, like you no doubt are, but ethnic minorities. Have you considered that?

Anonymous said...

It is also the democratic right of Normal People to boycott NewsQuest and those who advertise in thier publications.

Old Sailor

Epping Forest BNP Watch said...

I take a pragmatic stance. It could do more harm than good to stop the BNP from advertising. How many votes can the BNP win by putting up a banner ad on a website? How much justification would a ban on advertising give to its "we're being persecuted by a liberal fascist elite" line, which could resonate more with the public?

I remember the Natural Law Party putting up a massive billboard advertising campaign, with page adverts in newspapers. They put a candidate up in half of all parliamentary seats. And despite backing from George Harrison, they got 0.2% of the vote.

The BNP does not have the NLP's resources. It can only hope to have a limited advertising campaign. So how much will these adverts have on the BNP's electoral performance? Not much.

I would suggest people ignore these adverts and billboards instead of attracting attention to them with histrionics. Instead, put efforts into local, grassroots anti-fascist campaigns, give people knowledge to make an informed choice and urge mainstream parties to work harder to win votes.