An old university friend of mine is leading a campaign to make information free. Down in murky Brighton, his friend Jason Kitcat (yes, really) is putting clips of council meetings on Youtube.
This seems like an excellent use of new technology to strengthen democracy. After all, anyone can physically attend a council meeting. But no, the authority is claiming 'breach of copyright' and 'political use', which sounds like a desperate attempt to avoid the spotlight - after all, it's OK when a bored local watches you fix and plot, but Youtube exposes you to the scrutiny of the masses, and we can't have that. How can honest footage of discussions be biased?
Can a council 'own' footage of a discussion? Doesn't the council 'belong' to the taxpayers anyway? As far as I can tell, it's public property. Will they, as Jim notes, ban the reporting of council discussions in newspapers?
2 comments:
Hello.
I have been busy the last few days so I have just spent a few minutes catching up on your blog.
Well done. I am now angrier than I have been for a long time. So many posts wound me up. So many.
Sometimes when I read your blog I get an inkling of how Trotsky must have felt when he read Stalinist propaganda, in that in a general way he must have agreed with a lot of the sentiment but there must have been an overriding feeling of "that wasn't how it happened, that wasn't how it happened at all."
There you go, a nice left-wing reference.
Catch ya later Stalin, big love,
Ben
That gives me an enormous sense of achievement - normally it's you winding me up.
Post a Comment