h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

i have to agree that the new policy is defacto censorship.

and its a very good point that it is anti-community. its a shame that it wasn't offered to h2g2 to debate ahead of time to see if we could come up with another option.

i hardly ever read the newspaper, watch tv news etc. because its bad for my health. however i still feel reasonably well informed about the war. alot of my information comes via h2 itself. there is at least one researcher who is regularly posting quotes and links about the US involvement in all this. i haven't seen anything defamatory in any of her threads. i would hate to see her posts getting modded.(it will be interesting to see which ones do..what actually constitutes discussing the war ?)

its extremely unlikely that i will go the the great part-time debate site. i want to spend my time on h2, discussing with other hootooers. again it will be interesting to see what gets modded here, in general discussions where someone happens to mention the war.

i can proabably accept the restrictions on h2 for safety reasons, but i think the bbc needs to be honest about the consequences on free speech.

All of you complaining about this 'censorship' must either be too young to remember the last election () or not living in the UK.

During certain circumstances (elections, wars) the BBC has ever since I can remember removed programming from its radio and tv schedules which may cause it to be seen in any way as biased. 'Yes Minister' for instance would not be shown during a General Election campaign.

It follows that the same 'censorship' would happen on h2g2, and any of you who *are* older than three years and who *are* in the UK, and who didn't see this coming must have your head in the sand.

It's the price we pay for having no ads on the BBC. If you don't like it do something positive about it.

Like this: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/h2g2wd/

"It's the price we pay for having no ads on the BBC." What are you trying to say? That because we don't have to suffer having adverts we should shut up and take whatever we're given? "During certain circumstances (elections, wars) the BBC has ever since I can remember removed programming from its radio and tv schedules which may cause it to be seen in any way as biased." Yes, but if you believe the guidelines published on H2G2, the issue is not that we cannot have the discussions, but that they only have the resources to moderate them in one place, which is stupid. Moderation is one thing (a tolerable evil), a blanket ban on discussion is another (an intolerable one). "...too young to remember the last election..." This war is more serious than the foregone conclusion of the re-election of the Labour government. ;-) "Like this: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/h2g2wd/" Good idea (I've sent my subscription email), but as I said above and in my letter, the BBC policy limits exposure to real debate about Iraq. This list won't change that.

if the state owned broadcaster in new zealand started banning programmes during an election i'd be having a fit.

"All of you complaining about this 'censorship' must either be too young to remember the last election ( ) or not living in the UK....
It follows that the same 'censorship' would happen on h2g2, and any of you who *are* older than three years and who *are* in the UK, and who didn't see this coming must have your head in the sand."

well that would be quite a lot of us (non brits, or younger than 3 years). personally i had no idea, but i don't have my head n the sand either.

i agree that doing something positive is a good idea, and good on you Gosho for starting the list.

as someone not subscribed to the iraq thread, nor particularly active in war threads, it won't solve the problem for me which is that i can no longer access information and discussions about the war in the context of wider conversations.

I choose to be a member of h2g2, I do not choose to be a member of the bbc great debate, so I consider myself a victim of censorship.

PS only read first page of conversation, bit behind, spent most of yesterday in hospital

thinking...

could the BBC banning talk on iraq be so that they control the flow of conversation and transfer of information on a different message board, so that on this one all the truthful secrets about the war can be censored.

This of course, would mean that the BBC are controlled by, or in league with, the British Government, and that this is all part of a censorship cover-up, like that in World War 1.

Just a theory...

spook

ps. MI5 will be after me now

This *isn't*, as has been stated previously, a policy of the BBC: this is a policy of h2g2. Personally, I'm with the italics on this: the BBC has made other avenues of expresssion available and this will at least allow those of us who regard h2g2 as an isalnd of sanity in a turbulent world to enjoy it for what it is.

Kaz hi!*waves*get my email?

Right read the rest, can't believe we would have to put our full names to any postings, that strikes me as quite dangerous, who knows who might be compiling information from that list - paranoid am I - yes, and not ashamed of it.

Secondly the bbc is full of adverts, between each programme you tend to get 3 adverts for other programmes. The other night I finished watching something on bbc1 and caught an advert for a particular programme, then I switched over to bbc2 and caught the same advert. They are adverts, there is no denying that.

Yes I agree, this is a brilliant way for the government to keep an eye on everyone and their opinions during this conflict, I wonder how much the bribe was to get the bbc to do this.

Can't be bothered to sign up to yahoo, how about msn groups?

Of course this is censorship.

The BBC wishes us to reveal our sources for any piece of information which we impart - the problem is that "The Great Debate" messageboard, in common with all other BBC messageboards, will not allow the posting of any web addresses (save for BBC addresses !), nor any quotes longer than ten words. Hardly a satisfactory alternative ? Be aware that the reason for the BBC choosing the "Great Debate" mb for all the Iraq discussions is NOT because there are enough Moderators to go around (there are many more than you would think !) but because the directive has come down that debate on this subject is to be stifled.

The upshot is that, unless a contributor can find back-up for their post on a BBC site, their post will most probably be "zapped".

Had this policy been applied for the last two years, the vast majority of contributors to this site would probably not have been exposed to the truth about the US drive for power in the Middle East - I don't recall the BBC relaying much news about Halliburton, or US spying on UN delegates, or the PNAC - do you ?

Here's my AWW entry - A1001845.

This farrago has turned me off h2g2 altogether - to the BBC emloyees I say this - no guts, no glory......

I'm sorry but those of you that think this is censorship are hugely over reacting,

Firstly you can always give a false name on BBC message boards when you register, as I may or may not have done...

Secondly I'm with the italics as well, the BBC does have to be seen to be impartial on this, as it does on all things.. it is in it's polical guidelines and they are not up for debate. The impartiality of the BBC has been set in stone for many years, and a few people kicking up a fuss on a website is not going to change it.

This is a link to the page describing these guidlines.. the BBC does pay for this site, through those of us based in the, and it is a condition of using there SERVICE.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/info/editorial/prodgl/war_guidelines.shtml

Gosho, yes there are certain rules in place with regard to balance on broadcast news media around election time. These apply to all broadcasters and not just the BBC, and are enshrined in legistlation. The reason they exist is that broadcast media is seen as being extremely powerful in swinging public opinion - and we wouldn't want that at election time.

I see that scenario and the current one we are facing as fundamentally different. The first is restriction to try to ensure fairness and equality access of to all political parties, and this is straight up censorship.

Sorry to bother you, dear "Z", but relevance what does your comment about "giving a false name" have to this discussion ?

Likewise, your reference to impartiality ? Are you suggesting that, because the majority of posters to this site do not subscribe to the idea that War is justified in the present circumstances, the BBC should do away with their comments until such times as enough pro-War subscribers have found to balance the budget ? I fear you will be waiting a long time, old bean.

Have you not got a better argument ?

Hmmmmmm ??

* leaves nice refreshing cup of for the italics, who I fear are going to have rather a busy day today *

"This *isn't*, as has been stated previously, a policy of the BBC: this is a policy of h2g2. ."

Felonius, i don't think this is accurate. can you please link to something that supports your statement.


or if any italics are reading this can you please comment (from post 67).


thanks,
kea.

Firstly, please forgive me as i have been up all night and quite frankly my head feels like it wants to explode.

secondly - yep there are adverts on the beeb but only for up and coming programmes and they are as irritating as h*ll, (and noticably getting more and more frequent) but less so though than some company trying to sell me a cleaning product produced by a multi national.

What has come through time and time again in all these post is that we are very appreciative of the way the h2g2 site works. That we dont currently have to wait 2 hours for our posts to be moderated before posting and that we enjoy a friendly environment.

The bottom line is for the current time i am happy to comply with the new policy to keep the site as it is BUT rather than jeopardise the current peer moderation policy (which is still in a trial period) i will use other means to express my feelings on it. I will take it offsite so that the status of what is essentially a great place isnt tarnished by me and whatever action i may take.

Mort.

Arrrrgh ! In a hurry - please excuse obvious typos and misplaced words in last post !

taken me so long to write that post several more have appeared since.

Hi Z, good morning...

Careless talk can cause trouble and loose you friends but in times of international strife - Careless talk costs lives.
Carelees talk can and will continue but should not continue on specific topics at specific times. Because the BBC hold the purse strings they hold the right to make their own decisions within their own constitution. Just look on the present situation as a watershed.
Remember that actions speak louder than words and you always have the option to sign off.

I do have better arguments and I have posted them previously.

I commmented about giving a false name because some people have commented that they feel threatened that were asked for there full names.


I don't think that they need to balance every ant war comment with a pro war one, but they need the odd pro war one to throw in there...