CV v CCTV on Springer in Brum
According to the BBC, charity blackmailer Stephen Green of Christian Voice has threatened legal action against the Birmingham Hippodrome, which plans to run Jerry Springer: The Opera. Just as he said he would in this letter.
If you wanted to be deliberately offensive and provocative to Christians, you couldn’t do much better than put Jerry Springer: The Opera on at the Birmingham Hippodrome
He told the BBC
Fortunately, the Hippodrome’s chief executive Stuart Griffiths is paying no heed. Given the difficulty Green is having raising funds for his doomed blasphemy prosecution against the BBC, it is highly unlikely he will be taking any theatres to court. The most he can muster will be a handful of pickets, which will only serve to advertise the show.
A contrasting reaction to the news comes from “Bishop” Michael Reid of CCTV, who graciously said freedom of speech should be allowed:
I do think it’s different if people want to pay to go to a theatre, as much as I find the whole thing totally offensive. That is their choice and we’re against censorship.
What we are against is people using the airwaves, a public corporation, broadcasting it.
Because when it’s on TV people don’t have the choice not to watch, and banning it isn’t censorship? Never mind – CCTV won’t be on the picket line this time. Shame.
CCTV’s line is incomprehensible. The line between TV and theatre is surely neither that great nor that significant.
I can see the distinction that CCTV is making since their money, as TV licence fee payers, would have been used to fund the broadcast on the BBC. Censorship or no, they should have some say in how their money is spent. When it’s being shown at a theatre they can simply not see it and therefore not support it.
Christian Voice are just scum though, and no better than any other extreme religious group. You can’t really go any lower than blackmailing charities but threatening the freedom of speech of everyone else and a private institution like a theatre is still pretty damn bad.
So many issues raised here:
One of the important things is how one defines freedom. One can define it as being able to do anything legal. In that case, freedom is a good thing only if the law is correct. But laws are often highly controversial, and in any case they change over time. So unless one happens to believe that the current laws are precisely correct (which is not very likely) then we are back to square one.
In any case, freedom of speech is not the main issue. After all, even if people were not allowed freedom of speech, they would still claim it. The issue is the relative prominence given to informed speech and to ignorant speech. If they are both considered equally good, then we’re in denial.
Interesting that Green’s still not being pulled up on that lie about Jesus in a nappy.
If the CCTV think that their actions of trying to tack the BBC to court over showing Springer isn’t censorship then they are more barking than I originally thought.
Buggery bollocks, but that man gets right up my nose! First we get the glutinous prose: ‘In all, some 1,500 Christians came out on a cold, and in some cases a wet, Saturday night to stand up for their Lord and Saviour, mindful that He endured agonies for them when He died on a cruel cross on Calvary’s hill.’ Then we get the out-and-out sodding lies, ‘Maggie’s commendably distanced themselves at the last minute from any association with the show. That demonstrated how seriously they take their responsibility to raise money ethically and in ways which do not cause offence.’ The sheer gall of the prat leaves me almost but not quite lost for words (if I were lost for words you wouldn’t … oh, never mind). He conveniently leaves out his blackmail of Maggie’s. Grr, spit, damn, blast and piss on the man and all his works – from a great height.
[…] be applauded, so we’re looking forward to welcoming Jerry Springer: The Opera. (via Media Watch Watch) Posted by Paul in UK (June 4, 2005 at 10:23 pm) […]