The murder of British conservative icon Ann Widdecombe was barely reported when the usual suspects gathered to use her death to call for even greater censorship in the United Kingdom. The move follows Rahm Emanuel’s principle that you “never want a serious crisis to go to waste.” We saw similar moves after the killing of free speech advocates, including the Charlie Hebdo massacre. For some of the anti-free speech figures on the left, there must be a quiet sense of satisfaction to use the murder of Widdecombe, long a critic of censorship and speech regulations, as an excuse for even greater crackdowns on social media and the Internet.
Widdecombe, 78, a former Conservative minister and Reform UK spokeswoman, was found dead at her home in Devon with serious and brutal injuries. A 28-year-old man, Joshua Kerry, was arrested in connection with the murder.
Lucy Maria Powell, Deputy Leader of the Labour Party, immediately seemed to call for greater censorship and speech regulation after paying tribute to Widdecombe, stating we must “tackle … online algorithms and business models”.
Even former Conservative leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith joined the reflexive blame game on free speech:
“We need to reiterate, and the government and the home secretary needs to specify, to all those social media companies they must do something to close down on the visceral, violent language that some people use, attacking personally – as they did over her murder – which has shocked me, to make sure we get on top of that because that is the root of violence and death.”
It is all too familiar. I have been writing about the decline of free speech in the United Kingdom for years, including in my book The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage. A man was convicted of sending a tweet while drunk, referring to dead soldiers. Another was arrested for an anti-police t-shirt. Another was arrested for calling the Irish boyfriend of his ex-girlfriend a “leprechaun.” Yet another was arrested for singing “Kung Fu Fighting.” A teenager was arrested for protesting outside of a Scientology center with a sign calling the religion a “cult.”Last year, Nicholas Brock, 52, was convicted of a thought crime in Maidenhead, Berkshire. A man in Yorkshire was arrested for merely posting a picture with a shotgun.
In the meantime, many were quick to spread the false account of the murder. Journalist Dan Hodges insisted soon after the murder that “Police again very clear. No suggestion Ann Widdecombe’s death terror related. Or that it is politically motivated. And that speculation on motive is unhelpful to their investigation.”
It was a targeted attack, one of a line of such attacks on conservative figures. After the murder of conservative MP David Amess, the same calls were made on the left for more speech curtailment. Notably, his killer, Ali Harbi Ali, was an Islamic extremist and radicalized in his insular and extreme religious associations.
One of those arrested after the murder was former Green Party candidate and transgender activist Heather Herbert. Herbert went public with a celebration of the murder, a disgusting display not unlike the many on the left in the United States who celebrated or rationalized the murder of Charlie Kirk. As many mourned the death of this consequential figure, Herbert publicly expressed satisfaction with the murder and hoped that Widdecombe died in “agony.”
Herbert is an example of a tragic percentage of the population made grotesque by an age of rage. However, despite my revulsion at the posting, I still believe that the celebration of the death should be protected speech in the United Kingdom as it would be in the United States. Herbert is a web developer at Aberdeen University.
The arbitrary aspect of such arrests is reflected in the fact that the police initially said that there was no criminality in such comments but then flipped after an outcry. The conservatives and libertarians in the UK should not undermine the legacy of Widdecombe by falling into the same censorship demands as the left. We have also seen some on the right in the United States yield to such impulses, despite Kirk’s legacy of fighting such speech regulation.
“Freedom of speech” doesn’t seem all that complicated to me. Hillary Clinton did have a First Amendment right to claim she would be Ready On Day One as Commander in Chief, because she landed under sniper fire in Bosnia.
Free speech is like free markets, it’s gotta be “buyer beware”. People lie.
If it sounds to good…
Free markets? Whew….
But……………… NO one was shooting. LOL
That pseudo-sniper clearly could not have hit the broad side of a barn.
WordPress censorship here:
That pseudo-sniper clearly could not have hit the broad side of a barn.
More WordPress censorship here:
That pseudo-sniper clearly could not have hit the broad side of a barn.
Thank you, WordPress. Your censor is convulsive.
Thank you, WordPress. Your censor is convulsing.
Res ipsa Loquitur
When Johnathon reports Res Ipsa growth the UK is a meaningful share. I see no limiting principle to restrain UK censors hand against speech on this platform. Our current news is Ann Widdecombe died from hammer blows in her home. I wonder how the UK would view an article by AWR Hawkins about a perp kicking in a front door, and ending up with a third nostril in his forehead. The point is we live in an age where the internet makes us all publishers of our speech. Backed by a Bill of Rights. We’ve gone from Twitter’s Parag Agrawal’s “who can be heard” to Elon Musk’s “Nuts. I’m buying Twitter”. We formed the united States of America because of what the Old World was doing. It got a dose of who we are from J.D. Vance at the 2025 Munich Security Conference. What the UK really doesn’t like is that the Indispensable Right done our way is contagious.
AMEN
Censorship of citizens is not the solution. Let’s start by voting for adult leaders that try to unite their citizens, instead of electing a man-child leader trying to divide citizens and advocating for violent solutions.
In other words don’t vote for Trump like leaders, the result is violence, hatred and division. Leaders with great power also have great responsibility. Stop blaming citizens for bad leaders!
So those who oppose Trump are the uniters? What are you smoking? the divisive left framing reality is a big problem and seems to be bringing down the party.
Uniting people is NOT the goal – securing their rights is.
Political violence over disagreement is not justified.
Political violence over ACTUAL infringement on ACTUAL rights, after every other remedy is tried is justified.
No political violence on the left has ever been to protect actual rights.
The goal is not to unite, but to do the right thing.
Quite often what we can get supermajorities to say they agree on is pretty much the wrong thing
As the declaration of independence states – we have govenrment to secure our right – not restrict them
not even when most of us are united in one desire to restrict the rights of the minority, the few, the one.
Mostly we do not need to unite.
If we can not near universally agree – then we should do what infringes on out liberty the least.
Britain is toast. This has been clear for years. Labour and our dems are indistinguishable. Van Jones trotting out a (incomplete, even) list of everything mainstream dems have done and said *themselves* over the past ten years *without* the dsa and then blaming it on the dsa, for example.
These are ignorant, entitled, tyrannical people irrespective of country, and they count on others to be stupid, not grasping their own hubris or ignorance. It’s cute that there are progressives or dems that think there is any longer any such thing as a real progressive or dem. Brain rot? Drugs? Narcissism/sociopathy? Absurd levels of insular privilege? Oh, it’s likely a cocktail, and it crosses continents, and largely on only one ‘side’.
Regardless, stick a fork in Britain. It’s going to have to fail to get the point, and there’s likely no coming fully back. Sad, but let’s just be grateful it’s a country smaller than some of our states.
In our system we are free to abandon bad actors with checks and balances; they are not. If labour’s in charge, labour is in charge.
“Stick a fork in Britain”. It’s chic to give up on allies. Are you ready for US allies to “give up” on the USA?
The free world thrives on confidence and optimism. Pessimism/fatalism is a sign of decline.
USA is doing fine. We now see who our real friends are.
Thank you Prez Trump
Would anyone really notice if our US allies gave up on America? Would it really be such a bad thing?
It would not, and they will not.
One of the things that offends the left so much is that Trump uses the power of the presidency for the direct benefit of americans and american values.
The world is sometimes better if nations get along – but not always.
The world is usually better off if other nations join american values.
It is not better off when the US sheds its values for the world.
With allies like we have, who needs enemies? They certainly don’t share our values.
IFIFY
Great Britainistan!
Right now Mr. X is frantically punching away at his computer asking AI how to make Britain’s attack on free speech look like a good thing.
Um… let’s see you write up a coherent comment about why its not a good thing for Britain to attack “free speech”.
Heads up, the UK does not have a free speech clause in any law on their books.
Go ahead, show us how smart your are, or not.
I’ll take this one for hullbobby;
free speech is good. being against free speech is bad. Get it?
So hullbobby is deaf and dumb now? That we get.
And… what exactly is free speech? What is good about free speech and what is bad about free speech?
Get it?
ask stupid questions, get stupid answers.
This is the level of intellectual depth we can expect?
Yup. And your contribution is a deep as we can expect?
This lot will cut their own throats. Now let us all say ‘Insshallah”!, in keeping with their situation.
Typical stupid comment.
Much like yours.
Try to laugh. It will do wonders.
The UK is a totally lost cause, and imo unworthy of precious column space anywhere, save as a warning signal. Frankly, I would also venture to say that anyone who does not already clearly recognize that signal is incapable of rational thought under any circumstances. Professor Turley is entitled to publish whatever he wants, but to me this truly is an example of flogging a dead horse (well past the point where no flesh remains on the bones) It also gives me zero incentive to read the comments section and endure the incessant. imbecilic bleating from the resident woke troll in its various guises. YMMV…
Whiner. Then why do you show-up here every day just to piss n moan. Its about time you started your own blog.
What blog do you have?
DustOff,
The annony does not have a blog. Not smart enough to start one. This is an annony who cannot solve simple word problems. This is an annony who is a failure to launch, still dependent on his mommy and daddy for nearly everything. Can you imagine being 30 years old and that much of a loser?
but…but..you’re whining about their ‘whining’. do you see how stupid that is? I guess you don’t. Use your brain McFly.
Maybe the US should consider shipping firearms to the oppressed peoples of the United Kingdom. Seems the lady might have had a chance to save herself if she had been allowed to bear arms. Since shotguns are more liberally allowed in the UK, I would certainly recommend that all Reform candidates and conservatives obtain them for their households.
Just to be sure.
Ship firearms huh? And you could lead the first wave of the assault. In your wheelchair.
bearing arms has kept our government and other governments from screwing with our god-given rights for 250 years now.
I’d say firearms are the best and hopefully last-needed defense of human rights.
Every once in a awhile we get some young hothead in here with his better ideas for protecting our human rights but the truth is we like our firearms just fine.
Some young hothead? You mean GEB? He’s like really fing old. BTW, who is “we”?
AT the very least we is the 100’s of millions of americans who own guns
Nowhere did GEB make mention of any kind of assault. He mentioned supplying the oppressed people of the UK with the means of self-defense.
Did you ever pass reading comprehension? Oh, that is right. In the public education system, despite failing, they just passed you along and gave you your diploma. Then you were a DEI student at so-called higher-learning and they too just passed you along.
That would explain why you are a failure to launch, still living at home with mommy and daddy.
No but the US should say we will not tolerate other countries limiting the freedom of americans as a consequence of limiting the liberty of their on people. Nor limiting the rights of their own people when they are in the US, nor limiting the rights of their wn people – by placing burdens on US companies.
If the UK wishes to censor its own people the US should stand up and say fine – but you will NOT use US companies to do so.
All laws – even US laws that burden others with the costs of enforcing them are immoral.
The UK is perfectly capable of taking on the costs associate with censoring its own people – it MAY NOT transfer those costs to US companies.
Turley: “The greatest way of honoring the legacy of Ann Widdecombe is to support free speech..” They’re too far gone Turley. But, why and how? Get a bunch of geriatrics from this blog and sail over and attack Parliament? A beach landing at the White Cliffs?
Hey! Just found the annony! That is exactly how I think of annony!
I say we just make fun of them until they get really mad at us. bunch of big british babies don’t have free speech, we can just call them bullies and they have no defense for that and get arrested for it. American Revolution for the win!
The real question is where are the brave British people who took on an enemy in 1939 that most of Europe folded under?
Where are they… in 1939? Um… dead I suppose.
So the British public should attack something in 2026? The Germans?
No fool they should politically stand up to and attack the political BS that is corrupting their country.
They are you fool. You just don’t see that part in your newsfeed.
They should defend their liberty against those who would take it as they did in 1939.
Today that would be their own government
In 1215 they took o a government that infringed on their liberty
and the USA took em on and beat em too! 1776: best complaint letter ever!
so they have a history of being losers.
so you’re suggesting raising an army of the undead? WHO are you?? a wizard??
No I am flat out saying that the history of the improvment of the human condition is the history of greater freedom from government and that the UK has an actual significant and much longer history of that than the US – imperfect – just as the US is.
But millenia rather than centuries long
If you do an internet search, you might be astonished at the percentage of Londoners who are British. Britain no longer is the Britain of 1939.
so we shouldn’t blame people murdering others for speech they don’t like?
Just blame critics.
Got it….UK is a Fascist State!
Next hey lets make camps….for people we don’t like. Why should they be allowed any freedom! Then, why should they exist…fire up the Ovens.
We have seen these types before!
Types before? I missed that episode, refresh our collective memory? Oh, maybe you mean what the US did to native Indians, Jews, blacks, women etc. Of course the US is the land of the free home of the brave, nothing like that could happen here. Lastly, what critics? Got names?
Ano
US did to native Indians
_________________________
You left out the part on what Indians did to each other. Like slavery and mass murder.
US = white people. Get that?
How does that figure into what the whites did to Indians? Nothing was left out, you just can’t compered.
America is the greatest country in the world, but even America has warts; no country gets away with having none.
You can make us better. What country do you wish to copy? Stalin’s Russia? Germany’s Hitler, or Mao’s China? Let’s hear your solution.
I do not recall the US putting millions in ovens alive.
Spot on. These modern day Nazis different only in that the young skulls full of mush spouting g their nonsense aren’t wearing brown shirts.
All revolutions start on the left. The Nazi revolution in Germany was no exception.
Talking about mush in the head. One can see a lot of that on this blog. Not only do young liberals have mush, so do old whites here.
ano
so do old whites here.
__________________________
If it wasn’t for these so called (white) folks. You would not be typing BS on this site.
youngy, you should go look in the mirror, I think you have your first hair growing on your chin!
Now I can teach you how to shave and be a man! You’re a big boy now! proud of you!
fascist method of puinishing the victime
person murders you….you were blamed for saying they would murder you
Ironically, they were better off under a king’s thumb.
Which king?
all of them better than what they have now.
Didn’t Parliament and the PM Starmer downgrade the House of Lords recently? The king is next, once they get his 10’s of billions in assets.
In the West, the preferred method for restricting free speech is through civil laws, so that free speechers can make their arguments from behind the bars of their prison cells. The other method, far more efficient and Mao’s preferred choice, comes from the barrel of a gun. Currently, the Brits like the first, while Iran advocates the second. You will know the transition from the first to the second is underway when children are advised to report their parents for violations.
West, China, Iran…??? What about GB?
What is missing is the UK Police going after the Loon who uttered such vile comments that are plainly hate speech per the UK Laws. When you get nicked (British for “arrested”) for engaging in silent prayer or posting while drunk, etc…..then there is definitely a double or multiple standard of justice in the UK.
Yet you ask UK Labour Party members about UK Freedom of Speech and they are quite comfy with such arrests and prosecutions.
As a side issue….a recent poll showed almost half of the UK population knew nothing about the new Prime Minister….the seventh one in Ten Years….and the latest of some that were not elected by a General Election vote but were simply appointed by the ruling Party.
I suppose they should feel superior to us as the way their government is run every Citizen has a place in the queue (British for waiting line) for taking up very temporary residence with Larry the Cat.
Yet they show scorn for our electoral system.
Brits just don’t get it!
Suggest you start reading about the development of common law in the UK, starting with 1066.
The Brits get it alright, just you don’t. Or better said, you can’t. without understanding their culture.
If Britain is the mother country, thank God the US declared itself an emancipated individual at an early age.
“The US” did not declare itself emancipated, it did not exist until 7/4/1775. America was a colony, not a nation.
“. . . common law in the UK, starting with 1066.”
Huh?
1066 was the Norman Conquest, which led to feudalism and absolute monarchy.
English common law started in the *12th* century.
“. . . you can’t. without understanding their culture.”
And clearly you don’t.
Oh sam, you’re such a dummy. Try this, (Search Assist). English common law originated in the 12th century, specifically during the reign of King Henry II, who established a system of traveling judges and royal courts. This legal system began to take shape after the Norman Conquest in 1066.
“And clearly you don’t.” Um… you’re not right and obviously wrong. Thanks to AI eh Sam? Anon gets the point in this round. Keep trying sam.
Didn’t Sam say the same? “English common law started in the *12th* century.”
There is a difference between English Law and English Common Law. The first written evidence of English law was church-related, when St. Augustine established the Church of England.
But he didn’t acknowledge that the first “laws” appeared after 1066.
Law and common law? You mean a legal system right? That is, again, began 1066.
St Aug.. churned out canons, he was about souls, not laws pertaining to government of people and land.
Again, you are wrong. English Common Law began under Henry 2, though 1066 also influenced it. But at that time, the Law was fragmented. That is why it is more proper to use Henry 2, since he combined the fragmented laws into a whole. Written English Law, not to be confused with English Common Law, has its earliest documentation around the 600s.
Starting with the earliest written history, the history of man is the relentless but often slow move towards
“the maximum of individual liberty consistent with public order”
There were occasional steps backward – but the millienan long trend is forward.
The enlightenment – whith its pinacle in scottland is the last big step
communism socialism, all forms of statism ar the lest significant regression.
But the trend is towards the maximum in ordered liberty
I think Marx thought the British would be the first to succumb to his disease, but they didn’t. They had antibodies from the Enlightenment. Maybe today, they need a booster shot of enlightenment.
Thanks, SM. I have no idea how to reply to a comment that calls me a “dummy,” then agrees with what I wrote.
Further, the Normans (1066) weren’t even “Brits.” They were French/Viking conquerors. And English “common law” has a very specific meaning in the history of Western jurisprudence. It does *not* mean just a “legal system” or any old “laws.”
Sam, these guys put phrases together without any knowledge of history.
How would we know there’s ANY culture if they can’t speak? what an ignorant statement in favor of censoring human speech rights. horrible justification for causing human suffering. If their culture has no free speech then that’s not a culture, it’s oppression, plain and simple. people have a right to speak their mind and the brits DON’T get it, to their detriment as evidenced by their ‘cultural’ upheavals.
Contrast the level of discourse by UK Parliament leaders with United States Vice-President JD Vance. Consider what we had for VP in the previous administration: Kamala Harris. Listen to VP Vance articulate his political philosophy drawing heavily from St. Augustine of Hippo’s City of God, a work I have cited on this forum many times. JD Vance speaks eloquently, fluidly, at an intellectual depth that we just don’t see often in public leaders. This is truly an extraordinary interview of JD Vance considering the pablum we usually have to endure from Leftist word salad, e.g. AOC, Mandani, DSA types and all too many Democrat elitists: Obama, Hillary, Chuck Schumer, et al
Professor Turley should consider connecting with Bishop Robert Barron, an intellectual forged in the mold of St Thomas Aquinas, and perhaps be interviewed.
Interesting…
What exactly is the interesting part please?
Grow up child.
Again, what is the interesting part? Just one simple sentence dustoff, come on try hard, squeeze it out. Waiting….
When you squeeze Dustoff for clarification, he just emits hot air. You should know that by now.
Sorry Richard. I do not waste my time on fools like ano.
Are you trying to join his group?
“Contrast the level of discourse by UK Parliament leaders with United States Vice-President JD Vance.” What does that have to do with speech restrictions in the UK?
Thanks, Prof. Turley for your Excellent Review, which highlights the obvious, that Free Speech had nothing to do with Widdecombe’s death.. if someone is going to dislike the Politics of a Public fugure, which they can learn from the News, no amount of Free Speech or lack of Free Speech can stop a deranged person from murdering someone they feel led to kill. Widdecombe’s Opponents simply see this as a ruse to tighten their grip on the Public Discourse and control the Narrative.
“We will prosecute with vigor anyone who dares criticize this government over free speech issues,” said the Fascists in Britain.
And … And Trump wants to take away FCC licensing from NBC etc. for not showing his speech. Interesting eh?
so you are PRO censorship?
So you are PRO censorship?
Just eliminate the FCC problem solved
The correct solution is to eliminate the FCC
But if as left wing nuts are wont we are going to take property, Put government in control of it,
Then we should expect that goverment can require that the lessees cover government
Wow – pretty bad typing even from me.
The correct solution is to eliminate the FCC
But if as left wing nuts a refuse, and insist on taking property, Putting government in control of it,
Then we should expect that goverment can require that the lessees cover government pronouncements
Imagine, just a few generations removed from England, living in the new world full of freedom and discovery and then the King wants to make you as miserable as he has your countrymen back home. AND there’s no complaining about the king or off with your head.
The American revolution became quite necessary and we left those serfs to their king’s whims while our freedom made us great. Everything old is new again.
Well brits, stop complaining about your king(s) or CHOP! You don’t have rights over there, at least not ‘human’ ones.
It was all about a simple tax anon, not freedoms; the colonists had it very nice under George III. No heads were chopped off. If the Brits want to complain about a king, its their business, not yours. I wouldn’t complain if your king lost its head.
wow, where to start with you? First of all, I think my complaints are productive and the brits should listen to me.
The whole point is kings are bad and you can’t criticize them or else, off with your head, right? well you criticize Trump and keep your head! explain that, why hasn’t orange man come for you yet?
READ the Declaration of Independance (if your country allows you to) and you will read a long list of abuses. The greatest complaint letter of all time. Then come back here and you might make some sense.
So the green party in the UK is just as bad as the lib party in the USA.
_______________________
As many mourned the death of this consequential figure, Herbert publicly expressed satisfaction with the murder and hoped that Widdecombe died in “agony.”
Talk about sick. The jerks have lost their minds and what little soul they may have.
What difference does it make to you or any US citizen, you’re not a UK citizen right? Its none of your business what they do. But you, to whine about it is laughable. You have no idea what is going on there, just the crap the MAGA press feed you and you swallow it whole.
Anonymous in 1938: What difference does it make to you or any other US citizen, you’re not a German citizen right? It’s none of your business what they do.
Anonymous, not very bright.
Well, in 1938 there was no WWII. Not until 12/7/41. No one can understand the crap you spew. Just typical daily rantings. No sense. No smarts.
YEah sure thing Anonymous, nothing was happening in Germany in 1938 because WWII (Eleven) hadn’t started yet??? This is our education system at work folks.
Again, you just proved how stupid you are Hullbobby. Anon is totally right. 1938 was not the beginning of WWII. As for your incoherent blurp “in Germany”, what exactly was going on? Tell us, coherently please. Show us your education.
All I can say is wow!
HullBobby,
No, annony is not very bright or smart at all. Cannot even do simple word problems.
Tell us, what is exactly a word problem? I know its a tough question for you, but at least give it a shot. Show us your smarts and brightness.
Grow up you moron.
When you have a person from the green party or lib party, enjoying the murder of another is sick.
That’s the point.
The point? But still, what does it have to do with you dustoff? They can do what they want.
But as I recall, you relish, praise it, tout it when a an American liberal is killed or harmed.
Or when a foreigner, preferably dark skinned, is beaten or killed.
Is that the point too?
Name the time you recall when DustOff has “relish, praise it, tout it when a an American liberal is killed or harmed.
Or when a foreigner, preferably dark skinned, is beaten or killed.”
Name the time he did not?
Nor well he.
He can search away, but find nothing. I don’t think like that.
I can disagree with folks I don’t care for. But murder…. most of all over something you say.
Nuts!
oh snap you CAN’T! fail! How many other people have you disappointed? Anono V. Anono
ano
They can do what they want.
**********************
So you like the idea of murdering another person over speech.
Yep, tells me all I( need to know about you.
This ^^^ this right here, remember i was talking about ‘unhinged’??
The differece it makes is that restrictions on liberty elsewhere have ways to effecting the US.
When the UK or EU demands censorship on the internet – they are effectively censoring everywhere
We have already seen the UK arrest people for social media posts they made in Florida
ok, to take YOUR point, why is it any of YOUR business what Dustoff criticizes?
Over here in America we have a little thing called free speech where I get to call you a big baby.
“UK Politicians Call for More Speech Regulation”
In other news, the sun came up this morning. As an old saying has it: “There are two kinds of societies: those in which the people fear the government, and those where the government fears the people.”
And Trump want to take away FCC licensing from NBC etc. for not showing his speech. The stupidity of your comment is astonishing.
in the UK, you need a ‘loicense mate’ to watch TV and the lies come direct from the government, not some hacky political party.
No middleman, no questioning it. “do not critcize the king’s lack of clothing, it’s ‘fashion’ now.”
Need a license? Actually not a license, just register for access and pay a monthly fee. You pay for cable TV access in the USA, pay some 15x more than what a Brit does. You to get controlled speech from corporations. See a difference?
The Difference “Failure to hold a valid TV Licence when required is a criminal offense in the UK. Enforcement officers routinely check addresses, and if you are caught watching live TV or BBC iPlayer illegally, you can be prosecuted and fined up to £1,000”
Failure to hold… cable stealing is also a criminal act in the USA, including severe penalties, including fines and imprisonment, depending on the jurisdiction. See a difference? Where you going with this nonsense?
umm we have free airwaves for this. free because us Americans already own them! Why would we have to pay for something we OWN?
seems crazy to me but hey, you brits do you. glad there’s an ocean between us, you probably can’t smell the freedom from way “over there” (Remember that song?)
“You to get controlled speech from corporations. See a difference?”
A life and death difference:
Government has police powers, you know — people with guns. A private company does not.
Not very astute, are you.
Thank you sam but I think we have to stop battering this anon with logic, defeating his false equivalence.
i think it bothers them that we don’t need a “loicense for that TV mate”.
cable TV is only ‘premium’ service here, You don’t get packaged video options “over there”? (Remember that song?, of course you don’t)
Our airwaves are free to receive and belong to the public for the interest of the public. No crowns or otherwise to mess with our freedoms. try it sometime if it’s not banned in your country!
wondering why they didn’t want to show the President’s speech like they have done since forever? kinda weird to just change behavior like that without a good reason ya know? I WONDER why?? I thought they had an obligation to the public to provide programming of interest to the public to keep that very valuable FCC license. Maybe there would be another capitalist company interested in that license (a license to make big money!) that would better SERVE THE PUBLIC INTEREST.
Wondering why? Being facetious eh? If I owned NBC, I wouldn’t broadcast it, its a loss of revenue. Also, you can read the speech at your convenience, Trump saw to that. That FCC license does not force broadcasters to spread it across the USA. But Trump has an ulterior motive to call for the cancellation of licenses. Take a guess why?
oh sure, that license is worthless to them! It’s almost a hassle for them to have to renew it! NBC obviously have better things to do with their valuable time, like take down America from within and show ads.
No one would want this boring old airwave license anyway, it has no value! look! it’s ripped a little! Oops! they spilled coffee on it! yuck!
Please explain to me what conditions you think these license holders have agreed to?
Has he???? Let us know when he does.
“When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.