3 ms·
Where is “here”? In the US, for example, defamation is a tort, not a criminal offense. And calling the president or any other public figure a “Nazi” would be to
by leephillips 5y ago
Where is “here”? In the US, for example, defamation is a tort, not a criminal offense. And calling the president or any other public figure a “Nazi” would be totally safe.
- zozbot234 5y agoThe Grauniad is a U.K. newspaper. They're criticizing India for something that happens all the time in their own country. A total double standard.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- FpUser 5y agoInteresting. In regards to some countries this type of comparison is "whataboutism" and for others it is "total double standard"
- leephillips 5y agoThe article was a rather neutral reporting of facts. The facts should be embarrassing to India, but that’s not the newspaper’s fault. The Guardian often reports on similar issues occurring within the UK. Here are just two examples: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/feb/14/transgender-tweet-police-acted-unlawfully https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/feb/14/transgender-... https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jun/04/gender-critical-feminist-charged-over-allegedly-transphobic-tweets https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jun/04/gender-criti... So you are utterly mistaken.
- actuator 5y agoGuardian largely doesn't publish false news as such but is incredibly selective about the events it chooses to write about.
- leephillips 5y agoEvery newspaper is narrowly selective about what it writes about. Clearly the Guardian has chosen to write about free speech issues within the UK, regularly, putting the lie to what zozbot234 implied.
- actuator 5y agoIn the UK, yes. But my point was, recent incidents of suppression of free speech through law enforcement agencies by other parties in India haven't made it to Guardian coverage like this has. So they are selective about what they choose to write. Guardian is as infallible as any other media organisation run by humans who have their own biases.