Britain media black out on NHS - armed guards

Q. Does the UK government have the right to supress media coverage of a lawful legitimate protest ?
Maybe they did or maybe they didn't do it on this occaision but do they have the right to supress it ?

The question should be does the UK government have the ABILITY to suppress media coverage.

The answer is unequivocally NO. Big MEDIA no longer holds the reporting of events exclusively. We live in a world of mobile phones, twitter and Facebook.

Why didn't Sky news ( as an example) cover it?

Because they know that not enough people really cared to tune into a story about yet more NHS protests.

reply to post by mee30


So you think paying taxes is theft?

Do you fix pot holes on your neighbourhood streets out of the kindness of your heart? Or do you expect the council to do it? ( maybe bad example as council do a rubbish job of it, but you know what I mean)

I'm not happy with the amount of taxes I pay. The truth is, my money goes to fund other peoples life style choices, like your smoking, or my neighbours overeating. Sure it cheeses me off, but at the end of the day I do not want to live in a society where no one gives a # about anyone else, and it it's all about ME ME ME.

reply to post by Merigold


From my understanding a D-Notice is an offiical order to the media, generally to not report something.

Wiki - DA-Notice

Sky "may" have been unable to report it.

I agree now the story is about it will be impossible to stop the rumours as I said in an earlier post

They can D notice the lame stream press but will be impossible to do online. Be nice to see the thread with pic's and vid from the march. If there out there they will be found no doubt.

And theres video now too

reply to post by ukWolf


Yet no one has answered my question, was a D notice issued ?

There was a case a couple of weeks ago about Holly Greig, Sky news reporters were around the corner and were asked if they were going to report on it, the answer was no, they were there to cover the Ryan Giggs court case that he lost

Originally posted by ukWolf
Q. Does the UK government have the right to supress media coverage of a lawful legitimate protest ?
Maybe they did or maybe they didn't do it on this occaision but do they have the right to supress it ?

Talk of NHS reforms, pro or con, are for another thread IMO

You are assuming that this is lawful and legitimate! I disagree! 2 guys went to prison for putting on their facebook that people should loot! Yet these protesters are calling for the looting of peoples bank accounts yet it is legitimate to you?

What the hell is legitimate about demanding the government to steal more off people? Even people that are not born yet! someone has to pay!

D Notices are an official REQUEST not to report on something, not an ORDER.

The press can, and indeed have done in the past, decide to ignore that request, if they believe it is in the public interest.

From the very wiki-page you linked..

Any D-Notices or DA-notices are advisory requests so are not legally enforceable

Perhaps you should have read your own link first

reply to post by FFS4000


Agreed.

So for now I guess we will have to wait and see if more comes of the issue.

reply to post by FFS4000


Good question. My understanding of these notices is that they are issued to the media in the interests of national security, and that would make it a bad sign if one was issued just because of an NHS protest. They're not new though - we've had them for more than a century. What's new are the signs that the UK might be copying the draconian attitude to security that has been evident in the US lately.

So what are they going to do shoot people?!

reply to post by mee30


If the march was not lawful, it would not have taken place at all.
People would have been arrested on the spot.

Edit
Marches have to be authorised in advance in London

Originally posted by Merigold
reply to post by mee30

 

So you think paying taxes is theft?

Do you fix pot holes on your neighbourhood streets out of the kindness of your heart? Or do you expect the council to do it? ( maybe bad example as council do a rubbish job of it, but you know what I mean)

I'm not happy with the amount of taxes I pay. The truth is, my money goes to fund other peoples life style choices, like your smoking, or my neighbours overeating. Sure it cheeses me off, but at the end of the day I do not want to live in a society where no one gives a # about anyone else, and it it's all about ME ME ME.

You can not pay taxes! Tax is theft! It's like me demanding money from you and using force to get it then telling you that you should be happy to pay it! That is ridiculous!

Do I fix pot holes? No I would rather the roads not be there at all! They spoil my view! They pollute my air! I should be demanding compensation off people that want the roads! lol.

I know you are good intentioned and it is easy to think the way you are, it even sounds good. The reality is though that it in fact fuels the ME ME ME that you so despise! The current system of steal and spend is what has fueled the dependent/entitlement culture. The whole, it is my right for such and such product/service is just plain false! You have a right to be free! You have a right to make choices! (as long as those freedoms and choices do not effect another persons freedoms and choices). In this system I am NOT free! In this system I can not make choices!

Originally posted by ukWolf
reply to post by mee30

 

If the march was not lawful, it would not have taken place at all.
People would have been arrested on the spot.

Edit
Marches have to be authorised in advance in London

edit on 19-3-2012 by ukWolf because: (no reason given)

I can't say I care what the government deems to be lawful/unlawful, I mean it's not like they even stick the the rules that they make up! But I was more focusing on whether it is legitimate or not! But just for a minute humor me... What is the difference between the 2 scenarios I mentioned? Ie 2 guys saying on facebook that people should loot (steal). Or a bunch of people taking to the streets and demanding more money be taxed (stolen).

I see no difference here! It doesn't matter that it's for a good cause! Can I steal off people if I then give the money to charity? Or perhaps send it over to africa and feed some starving children? Would I be virtuous? Would I be heralded as a saint? NO, I would be a thief and I would be arrested! But if the government (well just a group of people really as 'government' does not exist!) wants to steal they can call it tax and it's all great! Even worse than that they can 'borrow' money on your behalf without your say so!

Are you ok with the fact that your kids/grandkids will be burdened with YOUR debt?

reply to post by mee30


Looting call on face book = incitement to commit acts of crime
Tax = legal / lawful in the eyes of a court (being fair does not come into it)

Originally posted by ukWolf
reply to post by mee30

 

Looting call on face book = incitement to commit acts of crime
Tax = legal / lawful in the eyes of a court (being fair does not come into it)

Ha Ha, what a load of non-sense, I'm sorry but I am not talking about was is fair and what isn't! I am talking about what is theft and what isn't! Whether the corrupt courts deem it to be so is irrelevant!

You have not tried to argue that tax is not theft, have you? That is because you know that it is! So demanding tax is also demanding theft! Which last time I checked was a criminal act! Why on earth would the courts accept this though? They are part of this corrupt system! The whole "legal" system is a sham! There is a reason that they use legalese so you need a solicitor!

reply to post by mee30


How about you go and start your own thread? Stop derailing this one.

On topic. That's a lot of armed cops for a protest, perhaps they were expecting a riot or something? The police presence alone , you would think would be a possible ratings boost, odd they didn't report on it.

reply to post by Merigold


You hit the nail on the head. I've been warning people about the evils of our ruling class for years, and as a result I am branded a paranoid weirdo. Even with all the crap that has been happening right in front of their eyes for years. We are living in a 1984 style dictatorship, and things are getting worse daily.

We have no right to protest any more, they keep saying we do, but we really do not. Few spoke out on behalf of the sick and disabled who have been screwed over big time by this corrupt government. Most of the people affected will find it extremely difficult to do any meaningful protest anyway, and the police don't care if they are sick and disabled either, they will mistreat them. The courts will rule on the side of the criminals who people protest against because they have the money to buy them off.

There ARE people awake, I listen to BBC Radio 5 quite a lot and every day there is someone who has their eyes wide open complaining, and even some of the presenters know what's really going on. But still, nobody listens. There are people who help the needy, who stand up for others, who fight for justice and fairness, but they are few.

The rest of people in this country fully deserve all the crap that is happening. Because they fail to stand up for those who need them, unless they can somehow benefit from it themselves. Because they fail to listen to those who warn them. Because they simply do not care about anyone other than themselves. Britain is a nation of selfish, apathetic, self-righteous, ignorant bullies and thugs. Its no wonder the immigrants segregate themselves.

reply to post by mee30


I have reported your continued attempt to derail this thread, you have been asked many times not to, your opinion of the NHS is irrelevant, This thread is about government censorship of the media and whether or not it is happening.

Back on topic:

This is becoming a worrying trend in the UK right now, this is the third time I have come across what seems to be state censorship of the media, and there could well be many others I have not heard about due to the nature of censorship.

It is a worrying sign, it is easy to understand why the government would want this protest kept quiet, their controversial plans are deeply unpopular, and have come in for massive criticism both from within the medical profession and from the general public, and they are very wary of being defeated on more of their reforms, but this sort of censorship is highly worrying, and probably only just the beginning. Our free press is obviously no longer free, I often had my doubts about so called liberal rags like the Guardian, from their rhetoric you would believe they are championing the people but stuff like this proves they are really just another puppet.

We have to rely on the internet for coverage, that just means they ill start to censor the internet sooner rather than later. I guess 1984 really is dawning upon us, I do worry for my kids future

Mod note:

The author of this thread has inserted this into their opening post:

Edited because of misunderstanding of this thread: IT IS NOT ABOUT YOUR OPINION ON THE NHS REFORM. IT IS ABOUT THE WAY THE GOV HAS HANDLED A LEGAL PROTEST. PLEASE I DON'T WANT A DISCUSSION ON THE NHS!!!

Please respect that wish. Any further posts not related to the handling of the protest will be removed.

ETA: do not respond to this mod note