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

Council hands back sponsorship cash after newspaper's BNP ad

A newspaper's sponsorship money for a community awards scheme has been given back after it carried an advert for the British National Party.

As one of seven sponsors, the Hampstead and Highgate Express gave £5,000 to the Exceptional People in Camden awards, which will celebrate the work of community volunteers in the paper's patch. But now the local council has decided to cancel the sponsorship arrangement for fear of damaging the event's reputation following concerns raised by the community after the ad was published.

Ham&High editor Geoff Martin said: "It seems to be a decision that was taken without consultation with us. I would say it's a spineless decision. I am supposed to believe no undue political pressure was exerted? I am sure there has been. This decision has blemished the awards irreversibly."

The Archant weekly caused controversy last month when it ran the BNP advert ahead of the local elections but the company later said it would donate revenue from any adverts to charity.

The paper has been heavily involved with the awards, including running publicity stories, and was due to be represented on the judging panel. Geoff believes that invitation is likely to be withdrawn in due course.

A spokesman for Camden Council said: "Camden Council has now made the difficult decision to end its sponsorship agreement. This followed strong and very public concerns raised by the local community and councillors across the political spectrum after the paper accepted an advert from the BNP.

"Our decision was taken by council officers after careful consideration around concern for the reputation of the council and the EPICs. This was not a political judgement about the Ham&High accepting advertising from the BNP. The focus of the event should be on the winners and other issues should not be allowed to get in the way of this important aim. We have explained our reasons to the Ham&High and thanked the paper both for its long-term support and the contribution it has made to the EPICs over the last two years."

The spokesman added that the council had enjoyed a "mutually respectful history" with the paper and hoped that it would continue.

"We do have a public notices contract with the Ham&High and will continue placing these along with adverts in the paper," he added.

"There is a clear difference between entering into a sponsorship agreement to promote our high-profile community award event and paying to place statutory public notices in our local paper to provide information to our residents."

Hold the front page