In common with many other bloggers, I am delighted to host the following at the suggestion of Simon Singh.
This week is the first anniversary of the report Free Speech is Not for Sale, which highlighted the oppressive nature of English libel law. In short, the law is extremely hostile to writers, while being unreasonably friendly towards powerful corporations and individuals who want to silence critics.
The English libel law is particularly dangerous for bloggers, who are generally not backed by publishers, and who can end up being sued in London regardless of where the blog was posted. The internet allows bloggers to reach a global audience, but it also allows the High Court in London to have a global reach.
You can read more about the peculiar and grossly unfair nature of English libel law at the website of the Libel Reform Campaign. You will see that the campaign is not calling for the removal of libel law, but for a libel law that is fair and which would allow writers a reasonable opportunity to express their opinion and then defend it.
The good news is that the British Government has made a commitment to draft a bill that will reform libel, but it is essential that bloggers and their readers send a strong signal to politicians so that they follow through on this promise. You can do this by joining me and over 50,000 others who have signed the libel reform petition at libelreform.org.
Remember, you can sign the petition whatever your nationality and wherever you live. Indeed, signatories from overseas remind British politicians that the English libel law is out of step with the rest of the free world.
If you have already signed the petition, then please encourage friends, family and colleagues to sign up. Moreover, if you have your own blog, you can join hundreds of other bloggers by posting this blog on your own site. There is a real chance that bloggers could help change the most censorious libel law in the democratic world.
We must speak out to defend free speech. Please sign the petition for libel reform at libelreform.org.
Wednesday, 10 November 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
2 comment(s):
It would be nice if more supporters of Libel Reform understood how hard it is for people with disabilities to find a voice in the media.
We face a lot of abuse. Free speech purists tell me we should accept it. They do so without even trying to understand the impact of psychological bullying on people who have had to live with illness and trauma. Such bullying pushes us to the margins of society.
It is trendy to support campaigns against censorship in far flung parts of the world but it is deeply unfashionable in the chattering classes to have any sympathy with people with unfashionable disabilities.
The result of this is that we are largely excluded from the media and political debate. Look at the result. Look at policy on disability, welfare reform and health. We hardly get a say in the policy which affects our lives.
So we could do without any more specious arguments that free speech means you have the right to abuse. Some of us wince when we hear that because we bear the real physical scars from actual abuse. Can we not express our support for free speech in a more inclusive way?
We all know it is unacceptable now in public life to rude about other races, religions and different sexualities and sexes so why is it acceptable to be abusive to people who simply the misfortune to have an illness or disability? If you support free speech support it for us as well.
@Beatrice: The first sentence of the petition (after the lead) is "Freedom to criticise and question, in strong terms and without malice, is the cornerstone of argument and debate, (...)", so I don't understand why you're complaining about this initiative. (To be honest, after reading your comment I can only assume you haven't read the petition.)
This campaign is important for everyone, and people with disabilities certainly will benefit from it. Libel laws have been used repeatedly to silence critics of pseudoscientific or even unscientific 'medicine'. If someone falsely claims to have a product which is beneficial to people with disabilities, wouldn't you want to be able to hear valid criticisms of the product?
Post a Comment