sunderry-and-strabane1

Members of Derry City and Strabane district council also voted to throw their support behind the group known as Total Eclipse of the S*n, which wants every shop to boycott the newspaper.

The motion, proposed by an independent councillor, was supported by Sinn Féin, SDLP and other independent members. There was only one vote against. Seven unionists, members of the DUP and UUP, abstained.

It was proposed as a way of showing support and respect for the families of the 1989 Hillsborough football stadium disaster. Independent councillor Paul Gallagher said: “In the aftermath of the Hillsborough inquiry, we wanted to show solidarity with the families, just as they showed solidarity with the families of Bloody Sunday.”

Could Derry’s Hillsborough vote on the Sun start a ball rolling? (Roy Greenslade, The Guardian)

John Gallen writes:

You may or may not like The Sun, but censorship is censorship. When did banning stuff become popular again anyway… when’s the next book burning?

Fight!

43 thoughts on “Sun Burn

  1. MoyestWithExcitement

    “Seven unionists, members of the DUP and UUP, abstained.”

    Of course they did. Children.

    “but censorship is censorship.”

    Except when it’s a boycott.

    1. notahipster

      A regular, often amusing, occasionally controversial contributor of this parish, who posts under another name.

  2. Vote Rep #1

    Today I learnt that boycotting a newspaper is the exact same as banning it.

    Thanks John Gallen for opening my eyes to what I had previously thought was a form of peaceful protest but now I know to be nothing more than a form of Orwellian censorship.

  3. jackson

    The left always loved censorship, its the backbone to any socialist state. The call for it here is in the form ‘hate speech’ legislation. criticising any group in a manner that causes offence. <<Actual Legal Quote

    ANY group (that the state decide)

    Critical of gender quotas
    HATE SPEECH

    Critical of religion
    HATE SPEECH

    Critical of Politician

    1. MoyestWithExcitement

      The right love to paint themselves as victims of authoritianism when people ignore or argue back against their bigotry and rage instead of coming up with a coherent counter argument, mainly because they’re extremely fragile and not very bright.

        1. Starina

          maybe you should get some English grinds before you sit the Leaving; i feel your linguistics are not up to standard.

      1. jackson

        How are any of those bigotry? its not about being victims of arguing back, its about being arrested and jailed for having ‘hateful’ opinons.

        Thats the simple issue, thats what the legislation is intended to do.

          1. jackson

            If you publish your opinion and it is considered ‘hate speech’ under the proposed legislation. Then yes you are liable to face prison.

            Why wouldn’t you? if you broke a law?

  4. rotide

    This is completely bizarre. 27 years ago this might have made sense, but now?

    Plenty of reasons to hate the sun, but raking up a headline from 27 years ago seems like a stretch. I certainly haven’t forgotten it (“Murdering Irish Bastards” and “Gotcha” also spring to mind as a reason to never even look at the paper again).

    Not sure I agree this is censorship though. It’s a movement to boycott the paper, not ban it.

    1. scottser

      although, who can forget ‘super caley go ballistic, celtic are atrocious’? that was pretty cool.

      1. rotide

        that was an all time classic alright and deserves many accolades,

        I’m going to allow it and imagine the sports department sub editors are great and wouldn’t gloat about sinking a retreating ship

        1. Kerri Ann

          It will please you to know that the headline was originally used in the Liverpool Echo about Ian Callaghan. “Super Cally Goes Ballistic, QPR Atrocious” fits the song even better, and it means we don’t have to admire anyone in the Sun.

  5. forfeckssake

    Boycotting is not censorship. All businesses exercise choice over what they sell. For example most book shops do not sell neo-nazi literature but they are not censoring it.

    1. Bob

      Actually isn’t there genuine censorship there, as it’s hate speech and so not allowed? (that’s what I would have thought, anyway)

    2. rotide

      Well that’s a pretty terrible example. Neo-Nazi literature is in fact state censored, hate speech and all that.

      1. forfeckssake

        Not necessarily. You can publish racist material if you can argue that it is not incitement to hatred.

    1. Fatman Scoop

      Was there ever a programme to stir the emotions like Reeling In The Years though. You can’t blame them for getting carried away.

  6. Jake38

    The patience of the English taxpayer is endless, paying for these councillors in their important work.

    1. some old queen

      My understanding is that the councils up north are funded out of the property rates which is obscene money every year.

      There must be no tribal flag waving over the chamber to be done when this is what they are up to.

    2. Kieran NYC

      They probably have no idea how many billions is sent.

      There would be quite a large majority who would be surprised to find out they still own it, and another large majority who would be to find out they don’t own Sawf Ereh either.

  7. Donger

    A bit off topic but has anybody watched the new Amanda Knox doc on Netflix? Nick Pisa, a journalist with the Daily Mail comes across as the scummiest, slimiest piece of dirt you could imagine. He is largely responsible for the ordeal that unfolded.
    He now works for The Sun

    1. bertie blenkinsop

      Watched the start of it last night ( between 10.30 pm and 11 pm ).
      He is an absolute toad, he was so delighted to be on camera he seemed to forget that someone had died.

  8. bsteve knievel

    I love the proles who wont buy the sun but always want the soccer on sky on in the pub.

Comments are closed.