GoddersUK said:W3bbo said:*snip*
oh dear... this post made me think of this - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7783640.stm
I do appologise if I caused any offence though, the post was not meant to be an attack on China, but on the UK Government/police force.
(EDIT: looks like I got confused here... that was in reply footballism's post)
@ W3bboSo it's reasonable for an employer to require employees not to have an opinion? And I'd be interested to know how the newspaper found out his details. If, for instance, they attained his IP address for Wordpress and then contacted the owner ISP to find out who it belonged to does that not constitute a breach of privacy (and surely it must contravene the data protection act too?)?
I'd also argue that psuedo-anonimity is a vital feature of the internet and all "free" countries should institute laws to protect those who don't know how to truly make themselves anonymous online from those who seek to uncover them. It seems the reason that this blog was taken down was because the police force didn't like it/it reflected badly on them. As a memeber of the public that funds the said force (I don't actually live in that region, but it's going to be fairly congruent across all regions) do I not have a right to know if my money is being well spent. And if the force is meant to be there for my benefit is it not right that I am able to see if it is not working for my benefit?
@blowdart - If it has nothing to do with the government then why does the article specificaly mention that he criticised government ministers?
Because that's what he did? Because that was his content? Because that's what piqued the interest of the newspapers in the first place?
Or are you suggesting the government in fact asked the Times to investigate it and discover his name?