Freedom to get it wrong

ANOTHER VIEW

Roy Greenslade
Wednesday 20 September 1995 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Tricky thing, freedom. People "believe" in it, as if it is a religion. They go to war for it. They make love in its name. But they rarely agree on what it is or how to obtain it. Freedom, in theory, is a pure concept. In practice, it is a nightmare cocktail of semantics, hypocrisy and compromise.

Two unrelated events this week confront us with this chasm between what rational sensible mature human beings claim to desire (total freedom) and the awful reality that so often forces us to bargain with the devil.

It is taken for granted that we in Britain do not enjoy as great a freedom of speech as people in the US. Our freedom to publish and to broadcast is qualified by a range of restrictive laws. We also have quasi-judicial regulators, such as the Independent Television Commission, which has just fined the pop music channel MTV pounds 60,000 for offending taste and decency. The fine, the second highest imposed by the ITC, is a disgraceful denial of freedom. One part of the fine was levied on a programme entitled Safe and Sexy, which showed the dangers of HIV infection. There were no complaints from viewers.

In anouncing its decision, the ITC revealed that it has been warning MTV about its content for 18 months. So, in private, a television channel has been subjected to a campaign of harassment by a group of suspect moral arbiters.

That the ITC has done this under the guise of protecting children from so-called "smutty banter" is not a convincing defence. There is no objective test of taste and decency. Inevitably, the ITC decision is based on the subjective assessment of its own panel, whose Victorian prejudices were illustrated so vividly in its recent condemnation of Channel 4's The Word. Its objections to that show were not only reactionary and anti-libertarian, but an intimidating threat to the freedom of broadcasters. Freedom, if it has real meaning at all, is also the freedom to offend, the freedom to get it wrong.

But America's self-righteous "free press" cannot afford to laugh at Britain's lack of freedom after the extraordinary case of the Unabomber. The Washington Post and New York Times agreed to publish the terrorist's 35,000-word manifesto (in the Post) after a great deal of pressure from the US government. It was pressure they should have resisted. Freedom has been compromised by a lone warrior preying on society. Voltaire would not have defended the Unabomber's "right" to be published. Just as certainly, he would have abhorred the ITC.

The writer is a former editor of the `Daily Mirror'.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in