![Censorship Censorship](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/censorship_64.png)
![Government Government](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/government_64.png)
![Politics Politics](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/politics_64.png)
Podcasting Censored by Government 241
PodCoward writes "VH is blogging that in Belgium a former talk-show host and now member of parliament for the biggest political party, Jurgen Verstrepen, received a fine of 12,500 Euro because he hadn't asked permission for his podcast." From the article: "The decision is apparently politically inspired and motivated by content, although formal reasons like non-compliance with Flanders' media regulation have been put forward in the motivation of the decision to fine. The issue has raised some serious concerns about free speech on the Internet in Flanders, about the definition of 'broadcasting,' and about territoriality."
Transcript of podcast: (Score:4, Funny)
*STATIC*
We are at war with Eurasia. We have always been at war with Eurasia.
Re:Transcript of podcast: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Transcript of podcast: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Transcript of podcast: (Score:5, Informative)
What this guy was fined for was a radio broadcast. He didn't get their version of an FCC license for it. The same recording was also made into a podcast.
So, the submitter says "Podcaster fined" or other misleading language to try and make it sound like he was fined for the podcast, rather than the radio broadcast, to get sympathy for this guy, both him and the submitter apparently belong to the same really shady, propagandistic far-right group.
Propaganda doeesn't always eminate from the government, it really comes at you from all sides.
Re:Transcript of podcast: (Score:2)
Re:welcome to kneejerk central!!! (Score:2, Insightful)
d'oh (Score:5, Funny)
European internet control needed? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:European internet control needed? (Score:5, Interesting)
Would you immediately generalize in the same way to cover the policy of the entire US when it's about a whacky decision in one state?
I hope you do, as European countries are less tied to the EU than US states are to the USA.
European Convention of Human Rights (Score:3, Informative)
This case is setting up an interesting collision between Belgium's domestic legislation and the European Convention on Human Rights [hri.org] (ECHR), comparable to (...although differing in detail ...) the collision between state and federal law in the USA.
This is a good thing. Ideally, of course, anti-racists or anti-anti-Islamicists would simply find a way to outtalk or otherwise pursuade racists, using reason, logic et cetera. But in the real world, it's normal and human to take shortcuts, especially where local
Re:European internet control needed? (Score:5, Insightful)
Hmm, a guess. Belgian gov't != EU perhaps...?
This is exactly the sort of value system that the Eurocrats
Eurocrats? Say after me -- b-e-l-g-i-a-n-s.
There have been no signs of this, rather to the contrary, in the country of "Eurocrats" I live in,
Rebut it, or work to change it. Calling it "trolling" isn't going to help anyone.
But generalizing governments to cover international organizations do?
Re:European internet control needed? (Score:3, Insightful)
I think the key is not power but accountability. All governments have a heck of a lot of power by default. The trick is to make the people in power answer in some fashion; regularly scheduled elections with unoppressed opposition parties is one of the best methods. In the case at hand, a member of the opposition party is being sensored apparently for political reasons. VERY bad sign.
Do you ever wonder... (Score:1, Informative)
A possible term for reading a blog... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Do you ever wonder... (Score:3, Insightful)
Isn't it somewhat illogical to first suggest that no one reads blogs, and then in the very next sentence say that you do, apparently in such amounts that you can recognize stuff that was copied from another blog ?
Belgium Man (Score:3, Funny)
Doesn't appear to be because it's a podcast (Score:5, Informative)
What an astute observation! (Score:4, Informative)
Ah, the guy wasn't fined because he had a podcast, he was fined because of the content of his podcast. That's a very important distinction.
I feel better now.
Weird, to me, anyway... (Score:2)
When I heard about the riots in France, I was shocked that they had the same problems we had...
===
That sort of censorship MAY have a good motive (that is, the concept the lawmakers might have is that if they don't publicize the racism, if they try to stamp it out through not acknowledging it, that it may eventually just 'burn itself' out...)
Re:Who is the tool that moded parent flamebait? (Score:2)
Try being in the American Armed Forces stationed over seas.
I stopped learning german for that very reason, I got to where I understood enough to really know they despise me for being forced to live in their country and spend my money to live here.
I was never interested in living here anyway, but to find so much blantant hate and complete inequal treatment of anyone who isn't explicitly german is absolutely astonishing.
(I will not generalize and say all of them are this way, My landlady is the
Re:Doesn't appear to be because it's a podcast (Score:5, Informative)
Not exactly. He was fined because
Of course, in reality, the only reason why this is happening is that the author (Jurgen Verstrepen) is member of an alledged racist party. Any policical or governmental means possibly are being deployed in this country to weaken their rights of freedom of speech. The case of considering podcasts as equal to radio broadcasting (other political parties or government organisations have websites with audio and/or video, without any problem so far), and fining them as such, is just another illustration. Sometimes I wish the Belgian government would be more adherent to the principle once stated by Voltaire (and, ironically, by default printed on all publications of one of our universities): I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Doesn't appear to be because it's a podcast (Score:3, Funny)
"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to misattribute this quotation to Voltaire."
Re:Doesn't appear to be because it's a podcast (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Doesn't appear to be because it's a podcast (Score:2)
Re:Doesn't appear to be because it's a podcast (Score:2)
The end result? Nobody dares to discuss these things in public forums and the racists themselves set up private forums in which they ban anybody showing dissenting opinions. Great going.
Typical Americano-Centric post (Score:5, Informative)
First of all, why do Americans have to get so high and mighty about Europe's anti-Nazi laws? Every time I hear someone go off on a law like this it's like a European gets their foot chopped off when they utter the word "Hitler" or "Nazi."
I really can't speak for any of these laws, but what I can say is that just because such a law exists doesn't mean it's all that bad, even if it seems counter to our own constitution. Our own constitution at times seems flawed, in that the right to bear arms is felt by some to be completely unnecessary and constantly misinterpreted by modern governments.
And what's worse is that people think that free speech in America means being able to say racist and ethnic slurs so that no law is created that might on the off chance prevent someone from actually uttering the word "nigger" or "dirty jew" in a sentence that is not meant as a racist slur but in an intelligent adult discussion about the evils of racism.
My Major problem with racism and racist fucks is that to me it's really a form of slander or libel, except you are doing it against an entire race. You can't publically call someone a baby killer, so why the fuck can these people in America call Blacks and Jews baby killers?
In an ideal world you have evolving government and changing laws. There's no reason to think a democratically elected government cannot craft legislation that put forms of racist language on the level of libel.
And how does this relate to Nazism? That's the whole point. Europe witnessed the horrors of Hitler first hand and up front. The US has these weird rose colored glasses on at times. We agree Hitler was a bad guy, but we preserve our right to free speech because we should be able to say absolutely anything we want at all times. However, maybe if we stopped allowing whites to publically slur other races sooner, we could have ended segregation sooner, prevented Japanese Americans from being sent to internment camps, and prevented our own ethnic crimes from being committed in Tuskeegee [wikipedia.org].
You can't cry fire in a crowded theater, you can't call Bush a baby killer without proof, and you should not be able to go onto a radio show and say blacks and jews are causing an increase in crime and disease and should be thrown in jails.
Re:Typical Americano-Centric post (Score:2, Insightful)
Ah, youth.
The reason those of us who have been educated with a sense of history is that the Europeans claim to believe in free speech, but they don't. You see, free speech means "Freedom to offend people". We broke away from England because of that principle, and we fought two great wars on the continent to defend those principals (against Nazis!). To see the Belgians, French, and Germans disregard the millions
Re:Typical Americano-Centric post (Score:4, Insightful)
Actually that's one of the benefits of these laws from the perspective of someone who doesn't have to live under them. They provide a nice counter-example to prove that criminalizing an unpopular opinion does not make that opinion vanish.
Re:Typical Americano-Centric post (Score:2)
And I honestly can't think that anyone's so braindead to believe that making the denial of the holocaust an illegal act will somehow make everyone automagically believe that it happened. Just like having the right of free speech or privacy in the US constitution does n
Re:Typical Americano-Centric post (Score:2)
> First, America sent its sons and fathers to die to defeat Hitler;
You make it almost sound as if the US deliberately entered the wars just to defend those principles.
And did those Europeans not fought in those wars to defend their freedom? And weren't those laws enacted by Europeans, who not only lost their father and sons in said wars, but also their
Too bad I don't have any mod points (Score:2)
Re:Typical Americano-Centric post (Score:2, Flamebait)
All of those travesties were committed by racist governments. Such governments are not going to pass racist speech laws (at least not laws they intend to enforce), and non-racist governments aren't going to commit such actions regardless of whether rac
Re:Typical Americano-Centric post (Score:2, Insightful)
As another poster already pointed out, that's utter bunk.
"preface: I am an american myself."
Well that explains it; but you forgot the "self-loathing" part. You seem to think that racism and other forms of bigotry and oppression are unique to America
Re:Typical Americano-Centric post (Score:2)
The point of free speech is not to protect what people want to hear, it's to protect unpopular viewpoints that people don't want to hear. Sure, you don't wa
Re:Doesn't appear to be because it's a podcast (Score:4, Insightful)
I'd prefer that my enemies make themselves known, rather than hide in the shadows. And it is sickening and somewhat frightening that a government would encourage the latter.
Re:Doesn't appear to be because it's a podcast (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Doesn't appear to be because it's a podcast (Score:2)
No, we're naive enough to let them spread their hate freely and recruit new members into their organizations, which is arguably worse.
Re:Doesn't appear to be because it's a podcast (Score:2)
What is admirable about the US is that the intellectual elite at the end of the 20th century realized that racism is wrong and has been trying to address the issue. But in practice, racism is rampant in the US, so the US has no credibility when it comes to telling other nations how to deal with it.
Re:Doesn't appear to be because it's a podcast (Score:2)
Granted, tolerance and acceptance in the states is hard to find these days (although it can be found), but to think for a second that these things are not common across the planet (and yes in Europe too) is a clinical case of I-see-nothing, I-hear-nothing.
And for the record I am a liberal atheist.
Re:Doesn't appear to be because it's a podcast (Score:2, Insightful)
Yeah, at least in Europe, we have the guts to say, "this may be democracy, but you have no right to speak".
The same kind of BS will happen here in the US (Score:4, Insightful)
Have opinions on candidates? Have a blog? Comment on blogs? Hit tipjars? Too vocal and influential?
Look forward to visits from the FEC.
Money is speech, speech is money. Talk too much and you'll be over the limit for campaign contributions.
Thank the honorable senators McCain and Feingold.
Re:The same kind of BS will happen here in the US (Score:2)
On a more serious note (and a bit off topic, this entire discussion has absolutely nothing to do with the actual article should you ever choose to read it), blogs are the perfect solution to the campaign finance problems. They are effec
Re:The same kind of BS will happen here in the US (Score:2)
When you have those answers definitively from McCain/Feingold, let us know. Then you can whine about people having too much money lying around.
Re:The same kind of BS will happen here in the US (Score:2)
The only way blogging could be affected by these restrictions would be if you were to donate over $2000 for him to set up his blog. And if a politician is requesting more than 2 grand so that he can create a blog, he is pulling your leg.
Already happened in WA State (Score:2)
More here [nwsource.com].
Free-speech has been repealed by John McCain and the courts.
Re:The same kind of BS will happen here in the US (Score:3, Insightful)
Money is speech, speech is money.
"What are you cuffing me for, officer??? What do you mean I can't offer to slip you twenty bucks for forgetting what your radar gun said! I was exercising my right to free speech!"
Bribes, no matter what you call them, are not "speech". Speech is speech. If I choose to make a posting on my own blog, or here on Slashdot, or (fill in the blank), of course that should be my right, political or not-and it is. No one's stopping me, and no one's stopping you either.
If I'm w
Re:The same kind of BS will happen here in the US (Score:2)
Considering McCain-Feingold, that is far from clear. Do you pay hosting fees for your blog? Aha, that's "money" and not "speech". And what about the time you spend blogging when you could be working? The opportunity cost of your time is obviously equivalent to a cash donation. (Don't laugh; that's not
Re:The same kind of BS will happen here in the US (Score:2)
Considering McCain-Feingold, that is far from clear.
I think the problem here is the implementation. Like most laws, it is flawed. I would not be surprised to learn that somewhere along the line from being just a bill to becoming a law it was deliberately made flawed by someone with an interest in the status quo.
But the fundamental concept that that bribes are not speech is sound - don't let that part get lost in the noise here. When it comes time for McCain-Feingold II, we shoul
Re:The same kind of BS will happen here in the US (Score:2)
The main issue I see as to where the dividing line should be drawn is incidental vs. total, and individual vs. corporate.
It is "incidental" that anyone pays for hosting fees on their blog, same with wasting a bit of time at work. The primary object of either of these things is not to contribute toward the candidate, they are incidental. Even if you start up a website on your own that -happens- to grow large, that's incidental.
On the other hand, if you do a massive amount of work on the candidate's "offi
A serious question about Flanders? (Score:3, Funny)
Can any concern about Flanders be considered a serious one? That's like saying there are serious concerns about what a father of four decides to have for dinner.
Different ideas of Freedome (Score:5, Insightful)
If you have ever heard Roosevelt's speech on the four freedoms can see just how hard it is.
The four freedoms are
Freedom of speech.
Freedom of worship.
Freedom from fear.
And Freedom from want.
How can you have freedom of speech and freedom from fear? Belgian is trying to give it's population freedom from fear be limiting racist speech. It is a trade off. It is really up to the people of Belgian to decide if that is a trade off they want. The US believes in a different set of trade offs. I tend to feel those are the correct trade offs for the US. Belgian is a democratic country and can and should work out what it thinks is best for it's population. Hopefully this is being debated in Belgian.
Re:Different ideas of Freedome (Score:3, Insightful)
Not at all. Freedom from fear can ONLY come from inside yourself.
Re:Different ideas of Freedome (Score:2)
fifth freedom... (Score:2)
Re:fifth freedom... (Score:2)
Re:fifth freedom... (Score:2)
The other point is that freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution go out the window in times of war. It was that way during the Civil War,
Re:Different ideas of Freedome (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Different ideas of Freedome (Score:2)
You see I feel differently. In the US we tend to believe the best way to fight things like racism is to have it out in the open. It is part of the idea that "Evil can only thrive in dark places". If the US outlawed the KKK and the Nazis they
Re:Different ideas of Freedome (Score:2)
Your example of the two little girls in Texas is interesting. Do you think that no where in Europe there are children being brought up to believe Hitler was right?
As I said, different places can and should make different trade offs. What works in the US may not be the right solution someplace else.
Slashdot used for racist agitprop (Score:5, Interesting)
Flanders does not censor podcasting (Score:5, Informative)
Officially, every "radio service" operator who has Flanders as his primary audience should inform the appropriate government institution of this. Podcasting is also considered a "radio service". The accused didn't do that, but Vlaams Commissariaat voor de Media makes no problem of that. In fact, the verdict sounds to me a bit like begging to do away with that requirement.
The actual conviction has nothing to do with podcasting:
* the program was also an analog radio broadcast channel
* the analog broadcast channel was for one political party
* it is illegal to operate an analog radio broadcast channel for a single political party in Flanders
* it is illegal to operate an analog radio broadcast channel with Flanders as its primary market without a Flemish government permit. They didn't have one.
B.T.W. Jurgen Verstrepen is a member of parliament for Vlaams Belang, successors to Vlaams Blok, both generally considered extreme right wing parties. Even if on most issues including part of immigration policy, they are probably to the left of the Republicans in the US or Howard in Australia...
Re:Any restrictions are wrong (Score:2)
This is a surprise? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:This is a surprise? (Score:2)
Re:This is a surprise? (Score:2)
As far as I can tell, French TV stations could broadcast interviews with Americans 100% of the time without running afoul of any French media laws.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:This is a surprise? (Score:2)
This was an attempt to convince the FCC that purchasing FOX would be acceptable under foreign ownership rules. However since Newscorp was still 85% foreign owned this turned out to be not a major factor in the decision to allow Newscorp to purchase FOX. The FCC can decide to approve foreign media ownership if it can be convinced doing so is in the public interest.
Most countries, the US included, heavily regulate radio broadcast m
Re:This is a surprise? (Score:2)
Actually all of them recognize it, at least those in the EU, since they have to subscribe to the European Charter of Fundamental Rights [eu.int] (see article 11) to be allowed in the EU. But it's more complex than that, see this post [slashdot.org].
Anonymously said (Score:3, Insightful)
Now look what hate has done to Europe in the 1930ies and look what it does to the world now. Freedom of Speech? The only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own good, in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it. How much freedom is there in a lie, or in half the truth?
How much freedom is there in hate?
Re:Anonymously said (Score:2, Insightful)
Who decides what is or is not a lie?
Who decides what is or is not hatred?
If your answer is anything other than "me", you are a hateful liar. This is why freedom of speech must include those things which an individual might consider hateful or a lie. Otherwise freedom of speech is nothing but a hateful slogan chanted by liars.
Re:Anonymously said (Score:2)
Re:Anonymously said (Score:2, Interesting)
Ah, so funny, these defenders of free censorship. Some more interesting facts:
Re:Anonymously said (Score:2)
So fight these people with ideas and argumentation, not with censorship and selective misinterpretation of broadcast laws. The apprehension many people feel about the idea of multiculturalism will not go away by such censorship and prosecution, on the contrary. Everyone who leaned towards the viewpoints of the VB party will now be d
Re:It wasn't really hate that did it (Score:2)
Nazism was simply a tyrant and his cronies who profited from massive unhappiness caused by economic downturn and unemployment after WWI to make their fascist dreams turn into reality. And of course the Jews, who didn't suffer that much from the economic downturn because of the way they are organised to a certain extent, were an easy scapegoat to divert the attention to. Fascism always needs some kind of external ev
Cripple politics (Score:2)
Editors should read the article! (Score:2, Informative)
To put it simple: the guy is fined for broadcasting racial crap (the nasty kind, not an intellectual discours on racial differences), which is a serious offense in Belgium.
Disinformation (Score:3, Informative)
As usual here in Belgium, justice department works a bit slow and it's actually for some analog broadcasts in the past (which now have been replaced with podcasts) he gets fined and gets urged
to do everything according to existing regulation.
The guy is political active for a convicted racist party and it's supporters now try to use this bit as propaganda to tell he's getting censored because of his content instead. Most politicians in Belgium are trying hard to ignore this kind of people but sometimes fail to due to the provocative nature of the party in question.
Re:Disinformation (Score:2)
A "convicted racist party". I think that tells us just about everything we need to know about 'free speech' in Flanders.
Max
Re:Disinformation (Score:2)
Re:Disinformation (Score:2)
If you don't get this very simple concept, you don't have the first clue what the word 'freedom' actually means.
Max
Re:Disinformation (Score:2)
Re:Disinformation (Score:2)
Important questions are: are there other people who are also failing to comply with local media restrictions? Are those people being fined as well? What is the content of other illegal broadcasts?
Enforcement of the law is fine. It is selective enforcement of the law, based upon content, that concerns me. We're dealing with the same issue
Belgium (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Belgium (Score:2)
They want to abolish wealth redistribution and escape the shackles of the french-speaking socialists aka walloons.
They want to have a referendum on the European constitution - very unusual for any european party, for the most part the anti-democratic eurosocialists prefer to avoid all that democracy stuff and just impose more and more of the european behemoth on their subjects without asking them for their opinion on the matter, so good for you VB!
And the VB are
Many of us know that about Flanders (Score:2)
We do. A very popular poem in the United States is "Flander's Field", written by a the Canadian Dr. John McCrae. Its probably the saddest poem I've ever read:
IN FLANDERS FIELDS the poppies blow
Between the crosses row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.
We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Fland
!news but politics (Score:2)
The rant about VB has gone on now for decades, quite frankly we're al fed up about it. Actually, the fine will earn VB those extra few votes they need to gain executive power. The other Flemish politicians are shooting themselves constantly in the foot. And the media (now including Slashdot) are giving them a helping hand!
BTW: I never voted VB, yet.
Not as simple as the headers make you believe (Score:4, Informative)
- Jurgen Verstrepen, the presentator of the program, is a high profile member of the political party Vlaams Belang / Vlaams Blok.
- Vlaams Blok was convicted in Belgium because of strong racism (and the lies they used to spread it). They changed their name to Vlaams Belang.
- Jurgen Verstrepen has a history of spreading racism on the media. He used to have a talkshow before on local radio where racists could spread their hate freely.
- The heart of Vlaams Blok is made up by old school nazi's. These people are orgaznized, prepared and ideologically strong. This is what make this fascistoid party dangerous.
- Aside of racism and a new order ideology (break the unions and a police state) their main goal is the destruction of Belgium.
Please put the headers in perspective,
A concerned Belgian citizen.
Reality Check!! (Score:2, Informative)
Secondly, the "biggest party" referred to (Vlaams Blok aka Vlaams Belang) is only the biggest party in 1 city in the country, and does NOT participate in government on ANY level in the entire country.
VH is blogging? (Score:2)
NOT a podcast (Score:2)
Also, just a podcast would also have been just fine and dandy.
Re:I'm sure glad... (Score:5, Insightful)
Tell 2600 magazine about how much more "free" it is over here. [wired.com]
Re:I'm sure glad... (Score:2)
An equivalent comparison between the case of Jurgen Verstrepen and the case of 2600 would be if the United States made it illegal to even argue agains
Re:I'm sure glad... (Score:3, Insightful)
Seems that when the US censors free speech, it's never the government's fault. It's the individual voter's fault for letting the government get away with it. But when the same thing happens in Europe, it's "evil socialist governments" who are at fault, not the individual voters.
Nevermind the complexities of the electoral systems and how much one's vote can actually change entren
Re:How Funny! (Score:3, Insightful)
Think about it. If Watergate happened today, it would rate an outraged blog entry or two on DailyKos, and be spun into evanescent gossamer by Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly. I doubt that the Committee to Re-Elect the President would even have to book an appearance for its representative on Hannity. The w
Re:How Funny! (Score:2)
Fitzgerald has been investigating for 2 years now and he's still not quite done with the indictments. The man has spent 2 years and hasn't actually gone before a judge and jury to force someone to defend themselves.
I do agree that Rush and O'Reilly have lowered the level of discourse.
Cordon sanitaire (Score:2)
Yet, the cordon sanitaire against the VB leads to this sort of inanity (ie the podcast affair) - the cordon should be scrapped.
That said, the VB is huge; they control the city of Antwerpen, which has Belgium's largest Jewish community. The VB is a large problem to the freedom of all of us in Belgium, esp. us foreign residents.
The spread of the fake European spirit, as embodied in th
Re:Cordon sanitaire (Score:2)
Oh, in the last election for the Flemish parliament, they got 34 percent of Antwerpen's votes. That was a plurality. That was over 1/3 of th
Re:Cordon sanitaire (Score:2)
well, my friend, if you want to stick to the issue, you will note in the first post i said the podcast censorship was inane.
moreover, i also called for the cordon to be scrapped.
the rest of your post sounds like it came straight from party hq.
Re:Howard Stern (Score:3, Insightful)