The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

Silence will fall

Posted on August 01, 2018 by

Well, that’s curious. No sooner had I got back home from the BBC Radio studio in Bath after going on today’s Good Morning Scotland to discuss the Corporation’s closing down of my YouTube channel than I found a new email from YouTube in my inbox.

No explanation of any kind was offered for the decision – we can’t imagine what has led YouTube to conclude all by itself that we don’t have the “necessary rights” – and it appears to let the BBC entirely off the hook from having to decide whether to launch a court case or concede the fair use of the clips.

We’ll be investigating further to see what we can find out.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. 01 08 18 08:56

    Silence will fall | speymouth

74 to “Silence will fall”

  1. Proud Cybernat says:

    ‘1984’ has finally arrived.

    Silence, it seems, isn’t always golden – though it will be to the BBC who obviously fear WoS. Why else take these quite extraordinary measures?

    So, we can be assured then that YT will be taking down all other such channels with similar content, can’t we?

  2. Neil Mackenzie says:

    There’s a Yoon in an executive position at YouTube, then.

    They’re a private business and not obliged by laws or regulation to provide services to anyone they don’t want to and, if they don’t want to, there’s nothing you can do about it. In the end, no-one and nobody has a right to a YouTube channel but YouTube.

  3. Heather McLean says:

    Just clicked on the link to listen to your interview and got
    “Sorry there has been a problem – Click here to try loading again”.
    I then got “Sorry, the page you are looking for cannot be found!”

    Actually surprised that they even interviewed you about it in the first place.

    Good luck with reinstating your You Tube channel – the whole thing stinks!

  4. Luigi says:

    Looks like they are trying to shield the BBC. There’s a surprise. The deep-state sponsored social media platforms in the USA (won’t mention em) seem to be trying to silence dissent on behalf of the establishment, so something big is happening across the globe right now. I don’t know if there is anything actionable about Youtube’s behavior in this?

  5. Richard says:


    Write back to Youtube and advise that as a UK citizen you own the BBC and therefor own the content

    Send them a copy of your BBC License which allows to to record BBC content

    About your TV Licence.
    This licence lets you use and install TV receiving equipment at the licensed place. You are covered to:
    a) watch and record programmes as they’re being shown on TV or live on an online TV service, including programmes streamed over the internet and satellite programmes from outside the UK, and
    b) download or watch BBC programmes on demand, including catch up TV, on BBC iPlayer.
    This can be on any device, including TVs, desktop computers, laptops, mobile phones, tablets, games consoles, digital boxes, DVD, Blu-ray and VHS recorders, or anything else.
    You and anyone who normally lives here with you can:
    Use and install TV receiving equipment here at the licensed place.
    Use and install TV receiving equipment in vehicles, boats and caravans (except non-touring caravans when someone is watching or recording TV at the licensed place).
    Use TV receiving equipment anywhere on any device powered solely by its own internal batteries.
    You and anyone who normally works here with you can:
    Use and install TV receiving equipment here at the licensed place.
    Use and install TV receiving equipment in vehicles, boats or caravans used for business purposes.
    This licence does not cover areas occupied solely by tenants, lodgers or paying guests.
    The licence might also not cover areas that are self-contained, areas covered by separate legal arrangements or areas of business premises used for a different purpose. Please contact us to find out more.
    Other conditions.
    We can cancel or change your licence. If we cancel it, we will let you know. If we change the licence conditions, we will publish a general notice on the BBC website and, if we consider it appropriate, in other national media. Our Officers may visit to check our records and inspect your TV receiving equipment. You don’t have to let them in. Your TV receiving equipment must not cause unreasonable interference to radio or TV reception.
    Even if you have a black and white TV, you need a colour licence to record programmes. This is because DVD, VHS and digital box recorders record in colour. A black and white licence is only valid if you use a digital box that can’t record TV programmes.

  6. William Wallace says:

    Jeezo, this is really disturbing. Governments now determining the content of social media. We have always been at war with…

    Someone somewhere has to come up with a more democratic and transparent form of social media. Something that is set up by the people on behalf of the people. It’s clear that the leading social media platforms of today are too open to establishment interference.

  7. Thepnr says:

    This contradicts all the so called Youtube “rules”. Of course the rules can be made up as you go along to suit their side when dealing with the Brutish state.

    You’ve been steamrollered by the powerful.

  8. Luigi says:

    Neil Mackenzie says:

    1 August, 2018 at 8:37 am

    They’re a private business and not obliged by laws or regulation to provide services to anyone they don’t want to and, if they don’t want to, there’s nothing you can do about it.

    Are you sure about that Neil?

    What about the furore about Christian bakers refusing to provide a wedding cake to gay couples etc? I think if you offer a public service, you cannot pick and choose who to serve. Maybe I’m wrong.

  9. Luigi says:

    Neil Mackenzie says:

    1 August, 2018 at 8:37 am

    They’re a private business and not obliged by laws or regulation to provide services to anyone they don’t want to and, if they don’t want to, there’s nothing you can do about it.

    Are you sure about that Neil?

    What about the furore about Christian bakers refusing to provide a wedding cake to gay couples etc? I think if you offer a public service, you cannot pick and choose who to serve. Maybe I’m wrong.

  10. Indyana Jones says:

    State sponsored censorship from the frightened British state. This will backfire on them.

    The more they refuse to hear Scotland’s voice, the louder Scotland will sing.

  11. Luigi says:

    Action against YouTube (pulling in the BBC’s role in it all) would certainly draw a lot of attention. 🙂

  12. Hamish100 says:

    Ask all the political parties if they or members or MP’s etc complained to the BBC. For the record of course. Surely leask and Gordon from the Herald will support you against state censorship.

  13. Macart says:

    So much for fair use. This reeks of ‘because we can’. FFS!

  14. Capella says:

    Keep in mind that copyright strikes expire after three months

    This is like the infamous 90 day law – South Africa – or the Cat and Mouse acts – UK. It’s a way of never having to define a decision but they can keep on rearresting every 90 days to infinity.

    Time to get your own server (based in somewhere like Iceland) to host material. If it takes a fundraiseer to hire the necessary staff then just say the word.

  15. manandboy says:

    As pressure on the British Establishment continues to increase, this kind of move by the BBC against Stu was always going to happen. The Establishment is desperate without limit to continue to hold Scotland for the exploitation of its huge and varied resources.
    The UK Government could easily restrict YouTube’s operations in the UK, so YouTube will do whatever it is told by 10 Downing Street.
    Not a good look however for the UK Government or YouTube and ultimately it will cost them dear.
    Hail Alba

  16. A. Graham says:

    “Copyright School”? WHAT? Really, how damn rude.

    Oh good grief, things are getting weird. Obviously I would not imagine that this could in any way whatsoever be intended as any sort of warning. “We have media power. You lot don’t, haha”, just to scare people away from sites that are not BBC.

    And Wings IS mainly a site of remarking upon, and offering well thought-out and highly cogent commentary of, news coverage by print and broadcast media.

    To borrow from Leon Rosselson, “I’m not suggesting any kind of a plot, Everyone knows there’s not …”

  17. Neil Mackenzie says:

    Luigi says:
    1 August, 2018 at 8:46

    What about the furore about Christian bakers refusing to provide a wedding cake to gay couples etc? I think if you offer a public service, you cannot pick and choose who to serve. Maybe I’m wrong.

    Maybe if you go to the USA and start some kind of lawsuit but, otherwise, any normal business can decline to provide goods and services at their own discretion or discrimination without having to say which it is.

  18. Thepnr says:


    “Action against YouTube (pulling in the BBC’s role in it all) would certainly draw a lot of attention.”

    Maybe that’s what they are after? Under their “rules” it was now for the BBC to start court proceedings against Wings which you have to assume the BBC were reluctant to do as why would Youtube intervene and make this decision, there is no benefit to Youtube by this action.

    Move on, there are plenty of ways to circumvent this decision to ensure that videos can still be shown on Wings over Scotland and that would be a victory of sorts without risking damage.

  19. Davo says:

    Interesting that the BBC launched the action just after Westminster went on their hols. I would be happy to chip in for a court action against YouTube. (I don’t pay the BBC tax so still have some change left out of my Netflix, Amazon and NowTV subscriptions.)

  20. David says:

    Can you/we start reporting every single use of BBC footage in unionist youtube propoganda.
    Or does the complaint have to originate from the owner of the material.

    Just throwing ideas out there

  21. Holebender says:

    Who knew Youtube had a Catch 22 in their rule book?

  22. Geordie says:

    Very strange that the BBC invited you in for an interview, however. That is significant and highly unusual. Either BBC Shortbread are not involved in or fully aware of the legal decisions being made within the Corporation (unlikely), or it’s a smokescreen, albeit a pretty amateurish one.

  23. orri says:

    Think the problem might be that there’s not enough original content being added to the clips. So their use on this website is OK as you add content. On Youtube it’s a collection of unaltered clips that fail some test of fair use. A subtitled commentary or some other method of indicating what you think the clip demonstrates.

  24. Big Jock says:

    I smell Shite!!!

    The same corporation that said Ruth Davidson was unavailable for comment about the dark money. Yet BBC produce a clip if her on Reporting Scotland commenting on the death of Alex Ferguson the presiding officer last night!

  25. Andrew Coulson says:

    I think I’ve got it: the ‘fair use’ rule allows _you_ to publish, and would allow YouTube to publish, if YouTube wanted to. But the rule doesn’t _force_ YouTube to publish anything. In cases in which there is a dispute about who owns the copyright, YouTube will avoid taking sides by restoring the material and leaving the parties to go to the courts to decide the issue. But in this case there is no dispute about who owns the copyright.
    If this is so, the only recourse the pro-independence community may have at this point, is to attempt to raise a social media storm.

  26. William Wallace says:

    Perhaps if Stu took up Truly Scottish TV’s offer for video hosting then crowdfunded battle lines could be drawn the next time the BBC legal department acts in this way.

    If TSTV were to resist the takedown notice for example thereby forcing the BBC to take further legal action, it could create some fairly negative press for the BBC and show them up for what they are: The establishment mouthpiece.

    This could work in our favour when we are attempting to convince others (particularly undecideds) of BBC bias. Not saying it would pan out that way ofc, just thinking out loud.

  27. Kevin says:

    Yes, it stinks to Hell. It’s clear you’ve done an exemplary job with these people as they’re now acting on your obvious and growing influence.
    Draw a line under this one, Stu. There’s no mileage in pursuing through courts etc.

    Formulate a new plan; relocate your material, publish on a more independent and triple-secure platform – crowdfund all this – we have money – but above all, continue to expose them and be the distraction they abhor.

  28. Macart says:


    No Beeb London voice available for comment followed by ‘we do this because… reasons’ from YT. This has blank, bog down and mire in bureaucracy written all over it.

  29. Cath says:

    What the hell is copyright school?

    Also, I wonder if the “BBC content” hosted by the Labour and Tory party doesn’t fall under copyright because its *their own* content, which the BBC just runs for them? Certainly seems that’s the way the BBC and unionist parties operate in Scotland.

  30. Derek Rogers says:

    I’ve posted a recording and transcript of your interview on my website at

    Take copies before they kill it.

  31. John McLean says:

    Convenient that the YT response arrives at a time when it is

    KNOWN you would not be monitoring e mail account.

    Nope not so surprising though.

  32. Clootie says:

    Looks like the usual Whitehall dirty tricks…

    A call to a friend at the parent company assuring him that a proposed look at their taxation “…will come to nothing,I’m sure”…however in the meantime it would be appreciated if you could help out with a little problem our chums at the BBC are having…

    This has always been how the Empire was run. It will always be how the remains of the Empire will run.

  33. Ian Brotherhood says:

    If Rev goes to Copyright School they’ll check his packed lunches for sweets from Aldi and Lidl.

  34. galamcennalath says:

    It is the BBC who are looking bad over this fiasco.

    The BBC themselves could prove ‘innocence’ and regain some respect by contacting YouTube highlighting the ‘mistakes and confusion’ over copyright and request WoS channel be reinstated!

    Stranger things have happened!

  35. Ian Brotherhood says:

    Where is this Copyright School?

    What if we all turn up with Rev Stu masks.

    What’ll they do then, eh?

  36. ‘The Scottish Government was accused of dragging its feet’ on BBC Radio Jordanhill this morning, over a cull of hares in the Highlands.
    But on the 90 second BBC Scotland nonsense News Where You Are on BBC England’s Breakfast TV they are no longer ‘dragging their feet’ over the hare hunt. Who accused the Scottish Government of dragging its feet, Gary? The BBC did.
    Once every half hour on the radio: The Scottish Government is dragging its feet. The Scottish Government is dragging its feet. The Scottish Government is dragging its feet. The Scottish Government is dragging its feet. The Scottish Government is dragging its feet. The Scottish Government is dragging its feet.
    Good morning,children. Before we begin our lessons, can anybody tell me what the Scottish government is doing?
    ‘Dragging its feet, Miss.’
    ‘Well done, Torcuil’.
    Gary Robertson reviews the English owned dailies, then a wee snippet about Serco’s evictions from the National.
    Gregor Townsend got a new contract and a bit about cricket and Sellick in Trondheim.Ph, and the European Championships in Glasgow and Berlin.
    Stu, you got 4 minutes on the English Full Breakfast Radio North Britain.
    Gary Robertson knows full well that the Yoon channels are not being targeted. Yet he shies away from that.
    More than his job’s worth, quite literally.
    You were interviewed tepidly by Gary Robertson of the BBC who without a hint of irony adjoined that the BBC (that’s you, Gary) did not provide a spokesperson to reply.

    BBC Scotland: why don’t you just close down entirely?

  37. Capella says:

    Lets all go to copyright school. Do we get a certificate?
    Answers are online too. 4:38 mins

  38. caledonia says:

    We all need to contact @TeamYouTube if on twitter not just moan about it
    I had some luck with these guys before.

  39. Luigi says:

    This is the thin edge of the wedge folks. The BritNats (BBC hid heids – all public schooled tories no doubt) are testing the waters before the IndyRef2 campaign kicks off. This is dip-the-toe-in time.

    Don’t be surprise if you hear of a few more (wee) actions by the dark forces in the coming weeks. All before the big clamp-down, which will be timed to kill off any chances of spreading the indy word effectively through the usual channels.

    Ye bin warned. 🙂

  40. mike cassidy says:

    Unless they go after other sites doing the same thing, the BBC will not be able to claim this is a copyright matter.

    And so their ‘fair, impartial and objective’ bollocks goes up in flames.

    Maybe a good way of underlining this would be to put in a third-party complaint to youtube about a pro-union channel with a lot of BBC clips.

  41. ScottieDog says:

    Just wonder if this is symptomatic of the end of normality as we approach a hard brexit.
    If we do suffer food shocks, take note Teresa, the Arab spring began when harvests failed and people couldn’t feed their family.

  42. Craig P says:

    2018. The year corporate social media died.

    *Targeted news/ad on Facebook with contradictory messages depending on audience, but promoting amoral interests with deep pockets.
    *Facebook no longer displaying content from people you follow.
    *Research showing use of social media contributes to unhappiness, with Instagram the worst offender.
    *YouTube censorship of public news.
    *Twitter ‘unfollowing’ you from people but not telling you.
    *The full-time job of whitewashing neo-liberal figures on Wikipedia by ‘Philip Cross’.

    People are ready for a new kind of social media that doesn’t seek to exploit them. Wonder what it will be?

  43. Cormag Rangvald says:

    Youtube are notorious for doing this, copyright strikes have hurt all types of channels. There are other video providers and there are podcasts hosting on spotify these days. Sure go the legal route to right any wrongs. But adapt and survive. YouTube is not the be all and end all.

  44. David R says:

    Be interesting to hear what they teach you at the copyright school as they seem to be more than happy to change the rules depending on circumstance.

  45. jfngw says:

    Westminster silencing Scottish MSP’s, Youtube/BBC silencing independence voices. The state seems to be stepping up the intimidation, their independence polling must be truly frightening them. Maybe if Holyrood calls for a referendum the MSM will not even report it.

    Without the section 30 I suspect the MSM will go down the illegal referendum route and refuse to cover any of the campaigning.

  46. Dr Jim says:

    I did notice how Gary Robertson described Stuart Campbell as the person “BEHIND” Wings Over Scotland as if WOS was somehow not a legitimate entity but some low level rebel enterprise skirting the bounds of legality

  47. robertknight says:


    In which case, Bienvenida a Cataluña Norte.

  48. Former vegan god says:

    It sucks. But at end of day you are driving people to your site via twitter and email notifications. Keep capturing email addresses. Email addresses are your friend. You still control all your content and have your own platform so you win. I rarely go to YouTube for your content. Almost everyone I know gets you via twitter or Facebook.

  49. jfngw says:

    It looks like we may need to start hiding people in our attics or hidden rooms from the UK state.

  50. Breeks says:

    I would like to see the Scottish Government, the whole London Calling team, Rev Stu and Peter Curran all putting their heads together and formulating a formal challenge to whether or not Westminster is performing adequately over the provision of broadcasting in Scotland.

    If we can put together a well documented and thoroughly researched program, just like London Calling 2, then let us put Westminster and the BBC under all sorts of pressure, and start building up the case and putting together the justifiable excuse for Scotland to affect a mini coup over Broadcasting, and simply start broadcasting a truly Scottish TV service.

    I know there would be serious ramifications doing so, but we are on the cusp of Brexit, and before very long, there are going to serious Constitutional ramifications for virtually everything we do.

    We need much more cohesion across our fronts, so that all of Scotland’s pro Independence forces react as one, and don’t allow any single one of us to be attacked in isolation by the British State without incurring the wrath of us all.

    If they can contrive reasons to shut down political discourse here in Scotland, then we can surely contrive to legitimate reasons to set aside the “reserved” status of dysfunctional and politically motivated interventionism with broadcasting.

    We are reaching the point where talking isn’t enough. YES2 or whatever we want to call ourselves must begin to coalesce as an effective movement with a distinct and clearly defined agenda and objective.

    If we are going to save Scotland from Brexit and see our emancipation from this dysfunctional farce of a Union, then we have just August, September, October, November, December, January and February to do it. We have 240 days left… just 34 weeks.

  51. Tammytroot says:

    what is going to happen/be announced in the next 90 days?
    The public are being prepared for state regulation of social media.
    This will be done in the name of protecting our “democracy” from sinister outside influences.
    (Like Stu).
    The public will applaud the government for protecting them!
    cf Google in China.

  52. Robert Louis says:

    Just look at what happened today. REVstu invited onto BBC, at the exact moment when Youtube were sending him an email saying he cannot get his video account back.

    The ONLY reason he was ‘allowed’ to be invited on to the BBC, was because the powers that be (in London, ENGLAND), needed him to do so. It makes the BBC look fair and honest, and Youtube to be the baddies. In defence the BC can now say, ‘oh, but look we gave him a good interview, a chance to state his case etc….’

    This is outrageous. This is the thin end of the wedge of censoring free speech in the UK. No wonder the Britnat establishment are so keen to be rid of the human rights act.

    Slowly, slowly, ever so slowly, the uK continues its gradual demise into totalitarianism. Nobody ever expects such things to happen. Everybody where this has happened, has said the same thing ‘oh it’ll never happen here, ‘they’ wouldn’t allow it’.

    It progresses until the point is reached where everybody notices, but by then it is too late, and the mechanisms are in place. Even well intentioned politicians become unable to act. Nobody, sometimes not even governments responsible intend it to happen. It happens by stealth, as a consequence of bad decisions to ‘make a country strong again’ or to raise ‘feelings of patriotism’. That is how it happens, often by accident.

    FFS, Nicola call the referendum – while you still can, and we still have the right to vote.

  53. admiral says:

    Big Jock says:
    1 August, 2018 at 9:13 am
    I smell Shite!!!
    The same corporation that said Ruth Davidson was unavailable for comment about the dark money. Yet BBC produce a clip if her on Reporting Scotland commenting on the death of Alex Ferguson the presiding officer last night!

    She’s also got the time to appear at some book launch event, no doubt covered by the kowtowing, knee-bending, slavering MSM in full glorious technicolour!

    Get back to the day job, Ruth!

  54. Richard says:

    We should simply compile a list of BBC clips shown by all unionist parties – publish the list and then bombard the BBC and Youtube with complaints

  55. manandboy says:

    Isn’t it amazing what Donalda MacKinnon can do as head of BBC in Scotland i.e. Brainwasher-in-Chief, as well as being a Leadership Coach. Now in cahoots with YouTube, apparently.

    There’s a lot more to brainwashing than meets the eye you know, like staying out of the spotlight. Donalda shuns exposure to both the public gaze and to public scrutiny because what she does is done in secret. Prefers darkness to light. In a world of propaganda dressed up as public service.

    She is key in the Propaganda War which attempts to prevent Scottish Independence.

    The Japanese had Tokyo Rose and Westminster has Donalda.

  56. Douglas says:

    I sense a ‘Lady Chatterley’s Lover’ moment (sales rocketed when attempts were made to ban).
    Trying to ban or obstruct will backfire
    Others have suggested links to sites outwith the censors control, I agree and suggest it is made clear why.
    Just hope this doesn’t use up too much of your energy and resources (clearly another of the censor’s objectives).
    Best wishes

  57. gus1940 says:

    With WM off on their hols it would be interesting to speculate what form Ian Blackford’s questioining at PMQs would be and May’s response to him if WM was still sitting.

    Suggestions from Wingers welcome.

  58. Breeks says:

    When the BBC can do so much and get away with it unchallenged, we shouldn’t be surprised that it comes back time and again, and a little more emboldened.

    The BBC is the enemy within, with a free pass to move amongst us. Without challenge, and vilification for its manipulative propaganda, it will only get worse and bolder still.

    We keep on hoping against hope that our stubborn elder No voters will wake up and see the BBC for what it is, but without leadership and alternative information, those hopes we have are delusional. When the Scottish Government turns a blind eye and deaf ear to the BBC’s BritNat narrative, what phenomenon do we think is going to trigger a backlash and rebellion amongst No voters over the BBC’s ruthlessly partisan agenda?

    All this patient tension and jeopardy about Brexit, and Scotland’s Constitutional sensibilities being trampled, might easily have been about power over broadcasting coming back to Scotland rather than the Brexit power grab. At their heart, both issues are about the subversion of Scottish Sovereignty. It’s the same fight.

    If we had taken on the BBC after YES 2014, we could have wrecked the BBC’s reputation for fairness and impartiality four years ago, and who knows, perhaps we might have secured some rights to broadcast news and current affairs for ourselves.

  59. Paul says:

    Invite you in to present a face of balance and fairness whilst behind the scenes continue trying to take power from the Indy movement. Pretty low.

  60. ronnie anderson says:

    Ian Brotherhood as if things ur no bad enough we’ll need tae fund the Rev fur a school uniform . Rev your inconsiderate if you had moved tae Scotland you wid hiv qualified fur a Clothing Grant , prefect badge & blazer braiding we can fund lol.

  61. ronnie anderson says:

    The Scottish Gov should be intervening in the feeding of GM derived foodstuffs to the Farmed Salmond industry it will only decimate the Scottish Salmon sales ..

  62. HandandShrimp says:

    No way that You tube ever move their butts that fast. It looks suspiciously like a take down by government. With that and the BBC screaming for government to control social media it would seem we are lurching into a rather more authoritarian environment. No doubt a Brexit bonus.

    We need to get the hell out of the UK.

  63. yesindyref2 says:

    I’m speechless.

  64. Clootie says:

    One thing we can all do is keep telling people about the BBC bias (…and of the Herald,Scotsman,P&J etc etc)
    Keep getting it into every conversation. Keep repeating it until you get sick of saying it! Only then will it be starting to get through to those who still trust them.
    If asked “what propaganda” talk about NHS waiting times missed spin, interview techniques, negative presentation messages, inability to comment on news stories in Scotland, the attack on Wing etc but NOT unionists sites.

    If we don’t open people’s eyes to the MSM bias then indy2 will be a harder mission.

  65. Clootie says:


    I have supported every fund raiser to date but I will draw the line at supporting a school uniform!

  66. CyberMidgie says:

    @Derek Rogers

    Thank you for the interview transcript 🙂

    I’m deaf, so I wouldn’t have known what was said without it.

  67. Moonlight says:

    New post ” For the Attention of the DG” Alex Salmond

    ERROR 404

  68. Jason Smoothpiece says:

    It certainty appears that there is contact between the Centre (HMG) the BBC and You Tube.

    On the plus side we can clearly see our enemies showing their hand the good old no comment routine and hiding behind sophistry.

    The problem for the Centre, who in fairness are getting a tad desperate due to the undeniable pressure they are under is that they are proving us right. They are handing over the evidence without a fight.

    Like brexit they have no plans they just stumble along hoping for the best.

    This level of desperation and recklessness indicates they may do anything we should prepare for the unexpected and the outrageous from the Regime.

  69. Gordon Pedersen says:

    Say somebody learned that Google has shown itself susceptible to pressure, especially in the DMCA-supreme and Trump-triumphant era. (Google owns YouTube, as you know.)

    Suppose that Google might even lean Trumpward more than it would like to admit in public. (Google owns YouTube, you know.)

    Say somebody has found out that the BBC has shown itself susceptible to pressure, especially in these days of ever leaner government budgets and/or need to look for corporate “sponsorship.”

    Suppose that the BBC really cannot be seen to be crassly, much less illegally, censoring fair use of its own content on the internet.

    Say someboday has discovered that copyright fair use infringement is actually a free-for-all where anyone can complain about anything.

    Suppose that YouTube scares more easily these days after being shown to be not so squeaky clean in the past about policing itself. Besides, papa Google wants to remain in Trump’s good graces more than it wants to uphold freedom of expression. Besides, robots don’t have a heart, or a head, and the robot minders are barely older or better read than their robots on the subjects of press freedom, suppression of dissent. Besides, YouTube only seems like a media outlet; it’s pretty easy to gag, really, unless YouTube itself stands to lose lots of money, wouldn’t one suppose.

    Say somebody says “Hmmm, think I can scare YouTube. Google’s not going to care about some (foreign) YouTube channel that publishes nothing of a kindly nature toward Trump’s good friend Boris Johnson and his cronies.”

    Suppose somebody knows some attorney who knows how to scare (“complain about [insert fraudulent complaint here]”) YouTube without implicating Google. Just a good citizen looking after sanctity of copyright in these days of rampant misuse of content.

    Of course, I’m not saying that this is what’s happening. It just occurred to me when considering what are the simplest explanations given today’s media / political climate.

  70. HameElaine says:

    Mass cancellation of our BBC licences on a set date in protest? I know many have done already, but done at a set time and date to make a point..?

  71. twathater says:

    Like Breeks and many others I am totally peed off at this open and deliberate assault and neutering of VITALLY important advocates of our independence cause

    This undemocratic and subversive action by a supposed national broadcaster to silence and frighten the opposition into submission , whilst blatantly ignoring individuals and organisations who share their goals

    While this is going on where are our protectors of democracy , where are the raised voices and open support for the freedom to expose wrongdoing and corruption , the freedom to highlight this biased organisation and it’s protection of miscreants , racists and bigots

    The Scottish public have to be made aware of the corruption and the lies being spouted daily by these defenders of the state ,or independence is dead in the water

    I have said many times on here and other sites that OUR SNP SG have to get the gloves off and stop playing by the establishments rules , stop being manageable , stop being embarrassed about WANTING to be independent , shout it from the rooftops at every opportunity , at least 47% of people are seriously supporting it , encourage people don’t make excuses

    Make no mistake this is a wee foray to see what we are willing to accept , what comes next , Stu Campbell has a target on his back what will they do next , arrest him , fit him up , the establishment have previous for this .

    Stu is a massive lynchpin in the independence cause , he exposes the corruption , duplicity , racism and bigotry of the brit nats on a daily basis , he DESERVES the protection of a Scottish Government on whose behalf and ours he is suffering being targeted

    We independists and the SNP SG owe him a debt of gratitude fighting for our freedom , the SG should not be ashamed to back his and our fight

    PS I am NOT sorry for the rant I am severely pissed off that this guy is being hung out to dry

  72. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

    Wait a minute @twathater says:

    La cavalerie est arrivée! (As they say en France) 😉

  73. Al-Stuart says:


    Obviously the BBC need to be dragged to account for this. Hilarious that BBC Scotland couldn’t get a talking BBC head from London to comment during your recent BBC Scotland interview.

    However, I think if Independence is ever to happen, we must declare UDI from the BBC!

    As a one man band you have managed the Herculean achievement of creating the premier political website in these islands. Even my friends in America tune into WoS.

    If one man can achieve such refreshing results in Scottish politics, what can one man plus a great number of supporters accomplish?

    Surely it is time for us to consider starting a Scottish Media Initiative?

    Growing our own Scottish media is a prime ingredient in us winning a YES vote at IndyRef2

    Topical information on this for delictation…

Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.

↑ Top