gaunt

i just thought i would call jon gaunt a cunt. an ignorant cunt.
the reason? i am defending the right of freedom of speech.
when jon gaunt was working for talksport he was conducting an interview with a councilor and decided that rather than having a serious conversation or a sensible debate he would engage in playground name calling. so out popped "health nazi"
the station received some complaints.
ofcom (the independent communications regulator) censured him.
talksport (the radio station) sacked him.

gaunt has taken his case to the courts claiming 'protecting the right to speak your mind was a right that we must all protect and preserve".
his lawyers claim his fundamental right to free speech had been infringed by the decision. (gaunt apologised on air after the exchange, which hints at the fact that even he knew that he had gone too far.)

liberty have also intervened in the case because 'of it's wider implications to free speech'.
i guess from liberty's point of view freedom of speech is fine when you are being insulting or bullying. though i wonder just how far they would carry it? i can imagine that 'coconutgate' has them all confused.
i imagine jon gaunt never thought he would have been bedfellows with liberty either.

one has to point out that talksport terminated gaunt's contract before ofcom began their investigation. all ofcom have done is censure john gaunt, effectively telling him he has been a naughty boy and not to do it again. (according to ofcom's site no sanction or penalty was imposed on gaunt, or talksport.)

so it seems that both gaunt and liberty are trying to prevent ofcom having their freedom of speech. bit of a contradiction, a conundrum. a storm in a teacup.
perhaps freedom of speech is fine when you are being a loud mouthed bully on the radio, but is not fine when you are an organisation pointing that there was no justification for the insulting material and that you were in breach of accepted standards.
it is almost like jon gaunt, that bastion, of free speech can dish it, but can't take it or to borrow from lance corporal jones "he don't like it up him".

gaunt has said that he regrets the form of words he used, he has apologised. talksport were probably wrong to sack him. yet gaunt is milking this and i can't quite understand why liberty have associated themselves with the case.
if you can't handle being told you are wrong then you really shouldn't be playing the 'big-i-am' on the radio.
if liberty are backing someone who is happy to refer to someone as an 'ignorant pig' (some reports say 'arrogant pig') and a nazi are they going to issue us all with guidelines as to how we can be rude and insulting to others?
the principle of free speech is fine and dandy, but we all know that speech isn't free that there are words we can't use, and that is no bad thing. yet i am struck that the whole point of gaunt's case is so that he can insult with impunity.

by the way there is no need to worry about jon gaunt he is working for murdoch on the sun's own radio show.

and because we are defending free speech here - he is still an ignorant cunt.

(i apologise to the readers for my language and my tone. i apologise to jon gaunt as well.)