Canadian Censorship Issues (off topic follow-up)

[Alexandra]

This is a follow-up from another topic on Canada where some interesting (but off topic) arguments surfaced . . . 

Let me explain . . .

In Canada, the press can be censored. In the USA the press cannot be censored, ever. Freedom of the press is abolute. Now there are cases when the press is asked to hold off the publication of information, but that decision is up to the publisher. In Canada, its out of the publisher's hands -- HUGE difference.

In Canada some books and videos (and other media contents) that are available in the USA are not available in Canada due to censorship laws (ie: some lesbian-related material).


This is not to say that Canada is an oppressive country, but rather, when it come to splitting hairs, ESPECIALLY for those of us in the publishing business, the USA is ahead in the open press/media business than Canada is.

For those of us who are TG, it may make a difference as there are people in society (even in the USA) that would like to have us "banned" but fortunately here in the USA we can't be silenced when it comes to the publication of TG-related material. As for Canada, we'd have to submit material to the censorship board first before being able to sell material in Canada.


here's a link to a partial list of recent banned-in Canada DVDs and comics.

quote:

FEBRUARY 7--Every six months or so, we like to check in with Canada's Border Services Agency, the governmental body responsible for halting the importation of obscene and objectionable material (in the form of books, CDs, videos, etc.). In quarterly reports, customs agents with Canada's strict Prohibited Importations Unit provide a detailed account of titles that have been judged admissible or prohibited. Released today, the most recent Border Services list, which covers the final three months of 2005, shows that more titles were barred than allowed entry into Canada . . .

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0207061canada1.html

[melissa_girl]

Unfortunately, this freedom of publication allows media to show stuff like Jerry Springer and Maury Povich and can give people a negative view of transgendered people.  The truth is, the majority of transgendered people are NOT like they have on those shows, so although what they show is not directly a lie (since there are some people like that), it is misleading.

Melissa

[HelenW]

Freedom of the press is often abused in the US, I agree.  I guess you have to take the bad with the good but, wouldn't it be a nice way to put the brakes on the bad stuff by allowing class action libel suits?  Wouldn't it be something to have 50,000 TG people sue the Jerry Springer show?

Of course, that might just destroy daytime talk shows and what will the people that watch them do instead?

[melissa_girl]

Of course, that might just destroy daytime talk shows and what will the people that watch them do instead?

Read real information maybe?  Yeah right.

Melissa

[Dennis]

There are, insanely enough, different standards for importation than publication. You are talking about importation, Alexandra. Publication is not restricted in the same way. We like our home grown smut, I guess.

I have no idea why Canada Customs has not been brought into line with domestic publication standards, other than some constitutional arguments that apply differently. That is, the Canadian importer is not the publisher and the non-Canadian publisher is not covered under Freedom of Speech.

Anyway, that's the legal long and short about it. We don't have censorship, we have importation restrictions. Other than during trials and that is because we don't have sequestered juries like you do in the States. And, hate speech, because that is a Human Rights Act violation.

Now I see where you're coming from, I think it's a limited interpretation of freedom, but freedom of speech is also very important in Canada and is constitutionally protected, but freedom to import is not, for some stupid reason. And I do agree with you that it is stupid, because if it was home grown it would not be subject to such restrictions.

I still think that freedom is more than freedom of speech. There are other, equally important freedoms that are also well protected in Canada.

Dennis

Oh, and the Canadian press cannot be censored. They can be ordered by a court not to publish voir dires, for example, in an ongoing criminal trial, or a complainant's identity, but the government can't just step in and edit.

[Alexandra]

Dennis, I wish I could give you a link to a media controversey some years back when canadians were crossing the border to buy up American newspapers to find out what was occuring in their own goverment.  I remember making note of that in a report on censorship I was doing at the time. I will admit though that in this day and age of the internet this kind of censorship would be hard to do.

Melissa and Helen, I hate to tell you but either something is a lie or its not. 50,000 "witnesses" doesn't matter if there is at least one "wacko" TG person -- besides, the Jerry Springer producers will simply point to TG porno on the net. Arguing "misleading" will get you nowhere unless you can prove finacial damage. IMO "banning" topics and shows is not the way to go here as we could find ourselves being banned. Education is the only way out of this one and we're doing that with things like this site.

PS: I really wouldn't want to ban Jerry Springer Show and the ilk because it wouldn't be fair to deny losers access to stuff that entertains them -- better that they're home watching Springer than being out in the streets among real people! 

PS2: I was just thinking . . . I have a friend who still needs to get the bottom half of his f2m surgery done . . . He's having a hard time raising funds and I'm wondering if someone would be desperate enough to appear on Springer to get the $$$ they need to complete srs? Food for thought. 

[melissa_girl]

I was just thinking . . . I have a friend who still needs to get the bottom half of his f2m surgery done . . . He's having a hard time raising funds and I'm wondering if someone would be desperate enough to appear on Springer to get the $$$ they need to complete srs? Food for thought. 

Talk about selling your soul to the devil.

Melissa

[Dennis]

Alexandra, I think with respect to finding out what's going on in our own government, our problem is more a monopoly on mainstream media. It's not censored per se. They're just in the pockets of certain governments. The non-mainstream media has always been able to publish that stuff without censorship, and some of it has since become mainstream because of the credibility issue with the monopoly media.

But yeah, being a large country with a low population, we have had problems like that. But they're not governmentally (officially, anyway) originated. It's because the one person who, and this was the case up until a few years ago, owned every mainstream media outlet in Canada was in the pockets of government.

The internet has also gone a long way to relaxing that hold. I remember logging on in 1993 and finding stuff on trials, for example, that our own media was court ordered not to publish.

I still don't think it goes to freedom, though. Anyone is free to publish stuff, it's just having the bucks and having the audience. Capitalism in a low population tends to limit those who can publish and have an audience. (Pre-internet anyway)

Dennis

[Alexandra]

Dennis, fortunately the internet pretty much makes many forms of censorship a lost cause these days. heck, if I came to visit Canada I could keep reading my American-published lesbian comic strip online! 

Here's a curious question . . . seeing that American porn is not permitted to be imported, are there publishers in Canada making a killing in that genre filling a void, or is there simply no void to fill?

[rana]

here is a test for censorship.  Those cartoons of Mohamed, started in that Danish newspaper & found offensive by so many moslems.  Have they been published in the US or Canada?  They have'nt in Australia because we do have censorship - not by the government so much as by the concentration of media ownership in the hands of a very few

[Alexandra]

there's this from ABC News on the cartoon "crisis":

"We believe in a free press," [President] Bush said. "We also recognize that with freedom comes responsibilities. With freedom comes the responsibility to be thoughtful about others."

Apparently Bush is telling us to censor ourselves. Too bad he didn't take responsibility to be "thoughtful" himself when he used the freedom of the press in 2000 to personally attack John McCain and drive him out of the Presidential race . . . oops, off topic again.

Rana, I did a quick search and wasn't able to find a USA paper that did print the cartoon, but it is all over the net. The cartoon itself isn't really that "awful" -- our presidential candidates have been subject to far worse.

Newspapers around the world SHOULD be reprinting the cartoon if only for the purpose of showing unity to those who think they can bully the press around.

[Dennis]

Dennis, fortunately the internet pretty much makes many forms of censorship a lost cause these days. heck, if I came to visit Canada I could keep reading my American-published lesbian comic strip online! 

Here's a curious question . . . seeing that American porn is not permitted to be imported, are there publishers in Canada making a killing in that genre filling a void, or is there simply no void to fill?

Yeah, there is some Canadian made stuff. There is also tons of American stuff notwithstanding Customs. Some importers, like Little Sisters Bookstore in Vancouver are very persistent importers who take Customs to task regularly, particularly about gay and lesbian porn, because the numbskulls at Customs enforce differentially.

Dennis

Oh, and Rana. I'm not sure about the cartoon at all. I suspect not in mainstream publications.

[HelenW]

The problem I have with Mr. Bush's comments about the "free press" is that he and his kind think it's great to have it as long as the "free press" agrees with them.  If not, though, they're labeled unpatriotic and abettors of terrorism.  For this reason I never pay attention to him regarding the media, especially since he's bragged about not using it! (In a CNN interview, I'll find the reference if anyone wants me to, please let me know.)  I've come to view almost everything that comes out of his mouth as neoconservative propaganda.

As far as the class action libel suit was concerned, it was only a bit of wistful imagination.  I guess I should have used the tongue-in-cheek icon to make that more clear.   

I think the violence over those cartoons that offended muslims is an example of the represseive effect of fundamentalist belief and is an attempt to stifle criticism of any and all Islamic dogma.  I'm stretching my imagination again, but if a minority of radical clerics can whip up the passions of their isolated flocks the resulting disturbances would serve, in a manner all out of proportion to the original occurrance, to repress any and all public questioning or critical thought about the motives behind their beliefs.  This allows them more freedom then, to act without checks from their constituency.  All repressive regimes, political or religious, operate more freely if no one dares to question them.  Thus the violence becomes the most vile sort of censorship, the purposeful destruction of property and life in order to smother critical thought.

helen

[Alexandra]

I've come to view almost everything that comes out of his mouth as neoconservative propaganda.

True, he blew any amount of credibility he might have with the WMD thing . . .  if he now has something important to say, how are we gonna know?