Should heterosexuals face execution?
Tags: You may or may not have yet heard about the BBC poll earlier this week, which asked the question, “Should homosexuals face execution?” No doubt as a result of worldwide outrage at the question, the Beeb has, of course, since quietly changed the title to “Should Uganda debate gay execution?” That’s significantly different, but the offending question remains in the small print. Oh, and don’t worry: if you’d like to see the way the poll originally appeared, Pinknews.co.uk and The Guardian have provided us all with screengrabs.
(For background reading, have a read of Ugandan ‘Anti-Homosexuality Bill 2009’ Proposed.)
Since outrage at the (original) poll, a BBC sub-editor (the director of the BBC World Service) issued an apology-that’s-really-an-excuse:
The original headline on our website was, in hindsight, too stark. We apologise for any offence it caused. But it’s important that this does not detract from what is a crucial debate for Africans and the international community.
The programme was a legitimate and responsible attempt to support a challenging discussion about proposed legislation that advocates the death penalty for those who undertake certain homosexual activities in Uganda – an important issue where the BBC can provide a platform for debate that otherwise would not exist across the continent and beyond.
Oh. Oh, the headline was “too stark”. “Sorry if you were too overly sensitive to get upset by it.” “Sorry if you were too overly sensitive, but this is a legitimate question to ask: whether state-sanctioned murder of people based solely on their sexual behaviour is a good idea.” Oh, I see.
Not, “It shouldn’t even be regarded as something for discussion whether homosexuals should be murdered by the state.” Or not, “We apologise for the initial question for discussion, which led to a litany of horrific homophobia to be aired on our website.”
So, if the BBC thinks this is a legitimate question to ask, let’s logically pose the converse question:
Popularity: 1% [?]
No related posts.
Loading ...
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by gaelick: New Post: Should heterosexuals face execution? http://www.gaelick.com/2009/12/should-heterosexuals-face-execution/6007/...
While I don’t think we should give a platform to homophobes, etc, I think sometimes we go a bit crazy. Why shouldn’t they ask the question?
Presumably the majority of responses were “Don’t be stupid, of course not.” but it’s useful sometimes to see the other answers — reminding ourselves and others that homophobia is still alive and well, and reminding society of the needs for special protections (hate crime laws, etc).
The reason this question should not be asked, CanuckJacq, is because this is more than a theoretical proposition. 37 African nations currently outlaw homosexuality. Rwanda and Nigeria are set to follow Uganda’s example by seeking to make it an offense punishable by death. In Sundan it already is. Gay people are quite literally fighting for their right to life.
This poll was placed on a BCC World Service talk board by a member of their Africa bureau. Personally I think that employee should be sacked.
I’m well aware of the illegality of homosexuality in African countries. I’ve been following the Uganda story for quite some time, and have a few gay African friends.
I still don’t think we’re better off hiding from the reality of that question. I saw more outrage over that question than I did about the Ugandan law being passed, which shows a serious lack of priorities in the community, I think.
That’s what we should be outraged about, not a question on the BBC website.
It’s one thing to ask a provocative question to shed light on an issue. It’s quite another matter to wade into a very live human rights struggle with a question that assumes a neutral stance on someone’s right to life. Would the cause of the American civil rights movement have been advanced by asking “should African Americans be lynched”?
This wasn’t the musings of a private individual. The BBC World Service is an internationally respected organisation that is funded by the British Foreign Office.
You can’t ask “would the cause be advanced” because the BBC is not a political or lobby group. It isn’t their job to advance an agenda. You can’t attack the media for something because it might not advance a cause. In fact, I’d be more likely to attack them for advancing a particular agenda because that’s not what they’re supposed to do, regardless of how right we think that agenda is.
I don’t think the question has harmed the movement against the Ugandan law. It certainly hasn’t made it seem more reasonable. It hasn’t advanced the cause of the anti-gay Uganda bill, and therefore I don’t think it’s really that objectionable.
I get what you’re trying to say (that they are a respected organisation who are appearing neutral on the subject of people being killed for being gay), but I think we’ll have to agree to disagree. I do realise that I’m the only person I know who holds this opinion, so I’m obviously just being difficult
The BBC doesn’t operate in a moral vacuum. It has to follow the broadcasting code laid down by Ofcom, which includes guidelines on “harm and offense”.
I’d just like to leave you with one thought. The BBC is obliged to give all elected political parties air time. Though they keep it to the absolute minimum, it means they occasionally have to let the BNP have their say. Every time the BNP gets air time their figures in the polls increase. Giving a platform to the politics of hate has very tangible consequences.
[...] Should heterosexuals face execution? | gaelick [...]