Canadian Journalists for Socially Beneficial Censorship

“Just another day in the Demented Dominon: ‘Canadian Journalists for Freedom of Expression’ are hot for censorship, and Nazi is the new black.”

Mark Steyn
11 May 2010

Apparently, Canada has an organization called Canadian Journalists for Freedom of Expression.

Who knew?

Certainly not Ezra Levant nor I. We never heard a peep out of them in 2008 as the Western Standard/Maclean’s cases were rumbling through no fewer than four of Canada’s many “human rights” commissions and tribunals. But don’t be deceived by their silence. They boldly go where no Canadian has boldly gone before:

We boldly champion the free expression rights of journalists and media workers around the world. In Canada, we monitor, defend and promote free expression…

Terrific. So last week the bold champions boldly put out a bold report – their very first on free expression. I thought of linking to it but, on a casual glance, it was full of very basic factual errors and didn’t seem to comprehend not only specific decisions from recent “human rights” cases but even the basic distinction between federal and provincial law. Aside from all that, it was very badly written.

Still, they’ve got a very nice designer, and he came up with one of those covers that your bigshot Amnesty International/PEN types like to do, where the words are blocked out as if they’ve been censored by the government apparatchik leaving only the title of the report visible. Bit of a cliche, but still quite cool-looking. But it’s kinda undermined by page five:

Any restriction on free speech has to have a clear social benefit…

As Ezra points out:

So let’s get this straight. Canada’s self-described freedom-fighters accept censorship if it has “a clear social benefit”?

Is that the test now?

I have a question. Has there ever been a censor, in the history of mankind, who has not claimed “a clear social benefit” to his censorship?

Has there ever been a censor so stupid as to describe his motives as being bigoted or political or inappropriate, as opposed to necessary and salutary?

So the CJFE is willing to accept censorship if it is done in the name of a “social benefit”?

This is what we waited four years for?

Indeed. I urge you to read the whole of Ezra’s evisceration because it is a thing of beauty…

This article continues at SteynOnline.

Comments are closed.