|
In
October 1988 the British Government issued and implemented
a broadcasting ban which at that time was seen to
be the sternest of approaches and most impacted on
the rights of freedom of speech and expression. Douglas
Hurd delivered the North of Ireland notice and this
meant that in the North certain persons belonging
to a variety of ‘outlawed’ organisations
could not appear on television or radio as spokespersons
of the groups they represented e.g. IRA, UDA. The
consequence was that the individual citizen's right
to judge for one’s self was essentially taken
away.
This
act illustrates the very essence of censorship. Defined
by the Oxford dictionary:
“Censor:
Person authorised to examine letters, books, films,
etc, and remove or ban anything regarded as harmful
- remove or ban thus, censorship”.
The
act of censoring can be viewed in a multitude of ways
- the broad definition could allow for a proofreader
changing sentence construction in a colleague’s
work to be a possible censor.
People
in the North of Ireland are generally aware of the
concept and use of censorship on many levels and in
many arenas of life. Those most publicised such as
the aforementioned UK broadcast ban or to the extent
of censorship seen as a direct British tactic to defeat
the propaganda war that has occurred over decades
on this island.
A
large population of the north have at one time spent
a period in prison as a result of engaging in paramilitary
activity or accused of such activities. It is general
procedure to censor letters coming both in and out
of any prison - that however did not stop people receiving
and giving out information in a variety of different
techniques. The idea being that if one knew the information
would be censored or was too sensitive for others
to view then there was always a way round beating
the ‘censors’.
Some,
and most defiantly myself see the right of freedom
of speech and expression as something that should
be enshrined in stone in every corner of this planet.
It is often what people die for, the reason for revolutions
and ironically most recently even being used by the
US/UK Alliance as their reason for invading and occupying
Iraq. On a home front the accomplishment of achieving
rights for all citizens of the North is part and parcel
of our groundbreaking farcical agreement. The agreement
that has seen our once revolutionary leaders cower
at the behest of Britain and its friends. An agreement
which the people of West Belfast were told was beneficial
to them. Did that agreement enshrine our right of
speech and freedom of expression?
So
the question and point of writing being - do we in
West Belfast have that right? Are we within our community
in West Belfast permitted to express ourselves and
speak our minds freely, as living in a democracy we
should be fully entitled to?
Answering
my own question, my young mind goes back in time and
thinks of all the mainstream media bias and censorship
in reporting the conflict in the North (and since
my memory only goes back to the 80’s, I apologise
in advance for my late birth in 1977, just for those
reading that might utter - where were you in the 60’s)
I think of the times I attended marches and protests
as a child and saw people beaten and shot at for expressing
their views and not fully understanding why. Now looking
to the not so far distant past I participated in anti-war
protests recently that saw the same thing happen -
oppressive measures to quell the message being delivered.
I understood this time round why extreme measures
where implemented by those whose role they feel is
to control.
I
deduct from thought and experience or maybe plain
common sense that it is those who believe to be in
a controller’s role that decide what one can
do or say. In the example of recent anti-war protests
it was OK by the controllers that we stood on the
path but once we moved to the road they decided this
was not appropriate and attempted to exert their control
via batons and arrests. On the occasion I speak of
however, the controllers did not succeed in their
aim to clear the road of protestors even though they
assaulted and arrested many participants.
Now
I see such a similarity between all these scenarios
of censorship and another that has gradually come
to light, the tactics are similar only in a different
context but it is still controllers exerting power
when things don’t go as they aim or plan on.
I
refer to the power hungry Sinn Fein and the way they
censor those they claim to represent. The tactics
have changed - or in actuality it could be myself
merely seeing the truth with my own eyes and through
my own experiences that has led to this realisation.
Watching how the party as a whole presents itself
and its objectives - it censors what it doesn’t
want people to immediately see both internally with
their movement and externally within the wider community
they aim to control.
So
why would such internal censorship occur? All political
parties have a party line. An example of everyone
sticking to a party line in Sinn Fein’s context
would be the lack of presence of any anti-agreement
Sinn Fein members. Now is this because they all strongly
believe in their right to administer British rule
in the North via Stormont or is it because any anti
agreement voices within the rank and file where hushed
up or sent packing? When conversing with any Sinn
Fein member on personal basis however they inform
me of the frequent healthy debate with rank and file
members and leadership - since I am not a member of
Sinn Fein I do not know if this is so - in fact I
have been told before since I am not a member of Sinn
Fein I have no right to criticise them.
Why
would Sinn Fein have to engage in censorship externally
to stretch beyond their own membership to include
those within the West Belfast community? On analysis
it might be possible to state that it is to enable
their propaganda war to continue just like the British
Government who implemented a broadcasting ban in 1988.
Those with connection to the party are attempting
their own broadcasting ban against other republicans
with a critical view. This is nothing new - it happened
before when republican writers openly criticised the
events surrounding the death of Joseph O Connor. Republicans
critical of current party policy are not permitted
their right to speak freely. Instead they are demonised
and described as “discredited”. Tactics
learnt from their British counterparts?
What
is to fear from healthy debate and criticism? As parents
we criticise our children’s actions and attitudes
to initiate change. As teachers we criticise the work
of students to initiate change in practice. As political
minded individuals we criticise what happens around
us to initiate change. As readers of a newspaper we
may be so bold to criticise to initiate some changes.
The latter seems to me the easiest to do, but what
happens if the said newspaper does not give one the
right to reply? Earlier I referred to prisoners getting
information out of prison past the censors by whatever
available means available. In any scenario there is
always away around the censors. Anthony McIntyre has
for a period of time did just that through the medium
of an online journal. (One I might add I am proud
to contribute to) Prizing as many do the right to
freedom of speech the reason for my participation
in “ The Blanket” was the opportunity to
speak uncensored and that I have been able to do regardless
of the topic - from Debating the Legislation of
Cannabis or Understanding Suicide Bombers.
The
fact is that individuals and groups are going out
of their way to stifle this ability to speak freely
via the intimidation of other website providers like
www.nuzhound.com who were recently forced to remove
links to The Blanket as a result of Sinn Fein /Andersonstown
News pressure. Was this really necessary? What
do the Andersonstown News fear from healthy
debate? Something that no reader from the Andersonstown
News is given the right - because just like Douglas
Hurd’s introduction of the broadcasting ban,
Martin O’ Muilleoir (and minions) have taken
away the rights of their readers to judge for themselves
by refusing critical republican voices the right to
reply in their over inked pages.
However
as many readers will know they went further again
when journalists in the New York based ‘Irish
Echo’ - the biggest Irish American newspaper
in the US - got wind of the censorship of the ‘Nuzhound’
website by O’Muilleoir and Co. The aim to highlight
this story was made impossible by the intervention
of the paper’s publisher Sean Finlay who fell
foul of the same libel threats. This action of censorship
did not go well for Finlay as two of his journalists
have resigned (Eamon Lynch and Sean Farrelly) - subsequent
angry communications from other journalists employed
by the paper have been apparently received from Finlay
for jeopardising the editorial credibility of the
“Irish Echo”.
O’Muilleoir’s
threats than any newspaper that prints a criticism
of the Andersonstown News written by Anthony
McIntyre may have to be changed to include those people
who value their right to speak freely and are not
as easily intimidated at the mention of Sinn Fein
being unhappy about what we write and publish as some
of our ‘American friends’ appear to be.
O’Muilleoir
has instigated this campaign of demonisation and censorship
against The Blanket. It is not the first time
and it surely won't be the last time that independent
thinkers are intimidated by a variety of draconian
attitudes and thinking. Unlike those who lifted rifles
and guns to fight for their right to freedom to speak
and express themselves - there are always those willing
to lift a pen.
When
writing turns into activism you must be doing something
right. When those in Teach Basil cringe and begin
legal proceedings to hide criticism you must be doing
something right. When pressure is put on other sources
not to highlight this criticism you must be doing
something right. When the editor of a newspaper stands
outside your house engaging in what could be technically
deemed as “anti social behaviour”(last time
I checked it was not accepted social norms to stand
outside someone’s house with all your minions
because you don’t like what is being said) you
must be doing something right When Robin ‘Squinter’
Livingstone attempts to unsuccessfully be sarcastic
in your honour you must be doing something right?
Lets
hope all those involved with The Blanket project
continue to do what they are doing right.
I
am pondering if we merely chanted “ securocrats”
as the cause to all our problems would O’Muilleoir
go find someone else to demonise and censor and give
us the OK?
Index: Current Articles + Latest News and Views + Book Reviews +
Letters + Archives
|
