Letter to the BBC

0 Conversations

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to complain about the BBC's policy of allowing online discussions about the war on Iraq on only one of its message boards. This amounts to de facto censorship and undermines the idea that the BBC is interested in creating online communities.

Specifically, from the "H2G2 guidelines for discussions during the Iraq Conflict" (http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A735275):

"BBCi are hosting a number of debates about the conflict in Iraq. It is essential to the continuation of these discussions that they are conducted responsibly and with the sensitivities of all parties in mind. In order to ensure that the debate remains balanced and informed BBCi have started a dedicated discussion area on The Great Debate message board which is being hosted by BBC News for the duration of the conflict.

"Postings and Entries on the subject of the conflict posted to h2g2 will be removed, please discuss the conflict on The Great Debate message board only.

"Discussions are being directed to this board in order to enable BBCi to concentrate its moderation and hosting resources, thereby ensuring that conversations can be carefully monitored and editorially balanced. It will also ensure that users can easily find other people interested in debating the same subject."

This policy is not acceptable. For a start, "The Great Debate" page is technically inferior to the H2G2 site. The "House Rules" for the "Great Debate" page state: "Please keep your posts to a reasonable length - around 500 words maximum. If you wish to post long articles, please do so at h2g2." Irony apart, this rule and the general policy mean that we cannot express views which require more than 500 words. Secondly, the "House Rules" state: "We're sorry, but you may not include specific URLs (web site addresses) in your posts. BBCi web site addresses are permissible. If you know of a worthy non-BBCi web site relevant to the discussion topic, please go to the Web Guide and recommend it by email if it's not already listed." Linking to external sites is allowed on H2G2, however, this rule and the general policy mean we cannot draw attention to external websites relevant to the war on Iraq. Thirdly, the "Great Debate" page is only open 9am to 9pm weekdays, and 10am to 6pm on weekends, whereas the H2G2 site is always open.

As well as these technical problems, this policy will reduce the number of people on H2G2 exposed to debate about the war. Not everyone will care to monitor the "Great Debate" page even if they are interested in discussing the war. Furthermore, and most importantly of all, people who are not going to go out of their way to discuss the war will not even be aware that there is any discussion.

For the reasons in the above two paragraphs, this policy amounts to de facto censorship.

The H2G2 Guidelines (quoted above) state that the reason for this policy is "...to enable BBCi to concentrate its moderation and hosting resources...", but this is not sufficient reason for censorship. Even so, it is not clear why the fact that we are actually, or soon to be, at war makes this necessary, given that the BBC's policy of ensuring editorially balanced political discussion has been perfectly well handled in the past by existing moderation mechanisms on H2G2. Have any efforts been made to find an alternative technical solution which don't involve a blanket ban on discussions on H2G2? If not, why not? If moderation is necessary, why not simply moderate those discussions on H2G2 that discuss the situation in Iraq? Since H2G2 moderators will, presumably, be on the look out for illicit discussions about this war anyway, would it be so difficult for them to flag these discussions for more careful moderation rather than simply banning them?

From the H2G2 Guidelines (above): "It will also ensure that users can easily find other people interested in debating the same subject." Providing a link to the "Great Debate" page is helpful, forcing people to use it is not. To suggest that this censorship is actually in our benefit is insulting.

Finally, this policy undermines the whole idea of an online community. This policy amounts to saying "You're allowed to talk about the war with those people over there, but not these people over here."

Please make every effort to reverse this policy which is antithetical to free speech and hence democracy, and which has not been sufficiently justified.

Yours,
Dan Goodman

Bookmark on your Personal Space


Conversations About This Entry

There are no Conversations for this Entry

Entry

A1001791

Infinite Improbability Drive

Infinite Improbability Drive

Read a random Edited Entry


Written and Edited by

Disclaimer

h2g2 is created by h2g2's users, who are members of the public. The views expressed are theirs and unless specifically stated are not those of the Not Panicking Ltd. Unlike Edited Entries, Entries have not been checked by an Editor. If you consider any Entry to be in breach of the site's House Rules, please register a complaint. For any other comments, please visit the Feedback page.

Write an Entry

"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a wholly remarkable book. It has been compiled and recompiled many times and under many different editorships. It contains contributions from countless numbers of travellers and researchers."

Write an entry
Read more