As a Brit, I couldn't agree more with our good hosts: UK laws around speech and journalistic freedom are terrible and oppressive. Americans, be happy that posting a youtube video of your dog doing a nazi salute won't result in a criminal conviction, and that anonymous complaints about offensive twitter posts won't lead to the police knoc…
As a Brit, I couldn't agree more with our good hosts: UK laws around speech and journalistic freedom are terrible and oppressive. Americans, be happy that posting a youtube video of your dog doing a nazi salute won't result in a criminal conviction, and that anonymous complaints about offensive twitter posts won't lead to the police knocking at the door.
If Jesse were British, he'd probably be doing as much hard time as Letby based on his twitter malfeasance alone.
I only managed to read the New Yorker article after scouring the internet for crude phone pics of the magazine pages, like someone back in the Soviet days getting a hold of crumpled handwritten copies of Western literature.
Tangential question: I read UK football news, and whenever there's a case of someone doing or saying something offensive (e.g. racial epithets from the crowd, nationalist epithets from one player to another, rando on Twitter publicly attacking a player), I cannot find any press outlet reporting what the offensive thing actually was. And I do understand why, for reasons of discretion, some of the major papers would choose to leave this out. But it seems like no one reports it, not even half-censored versions. Is this a strongly adhered to journalistic convention, or would the papers be putting themselves in legal jeopardy for publishing the offensive thing?
As a Toronto-based Liverpool fan, I read such stories too and am confused. They never report what was said. And why do you never see such stories about North American sports. Are Canadian and American fans so much better behaved that they never attack players online? I see such stories from the UK and file them under, "That Would Never Happen Here."
As a Brit, I couldn't agree more with our good hosts: UK laws around speech and journalistic freedom are terrible and oppressive. Americans, be happy that posting a youtube video of your dog doing a nazi salute won't result in a criminal conviction, and that anonymous complaints about offensive twitter posts won't lead to the police knocking at the door.
If Jesse were British, he'd probably be doing as much hard time as Letby based on his twitter malfeasance alone.
I only managed to read the New Yorker article after scouring the internet for crude phone pics of the magazine pages, like someone back in the Soviet days getting a hold of crumpled handwritten copies of Western literature.
Tangential question: I read UK football news, and whenever there's a case of someone doing or saying something offensive (e.g. racial epithets from the crowd, nationalist epithets from one player to another, rando on Twitter publicly attacking a player), I cannot find any press outlet reporting what the offensive thing actually was. And I do understand why, for reasons of discretion, some of the major papers would choose to leave this out. But it seems like no one reports it, not even half-censored versions. Is this a strongly adhered to journalistic convention, or would the papers be putting themselves in legal jeopardy for publishing the offensive thing?
As a Toronto-based Liverpool fan, I read such stories too and am confused. They never report what was said. And why do you never see such stories about North American sports. Are Canadian and American fans so much better behaved that they never attack players online? I see such stories from the UK and file them under, "That Would Never Happen Here."