‘Censorship slowly rots society’, argues Matthew Parris (Wrestle over
free speech goes on, Dec 30). I absolutely agree. But censorship not of
the media, but by the media, which he fails to mention, is a
factor more putrefying than any other.
Parris wisely observes that ‘protecting people from harm has an emotive
appeal that the defenders of free speech will always struggle to counter’. Even
journalists apparently succumb to this emotive appeal.
Presumably it’s a natural
inclination to protect women from painful reminders of their personal tragedies,
the trauma of abortion, which explains the media’s persistent failure to allow
pro-lifers freedom of speech - and as probably one in three women in New Zealand
have suffered an abortion, to do so would certainly qualify as shouting ‘Fire!’
in a crowded theatre.
But the media’s raison d’etre is to inform, and in this instance,
to inform women of the health risks of abortion.
In the wrestle over free speech in regard to abortion, in which corner are
New Zealand’s media, in particular The Dominion Post ?
No comments:
Post a Comment