The provincial government of British Columbia will not punish the magazine Maclean’s for running an article exposing Islam to asperity (coverage at Steyn’s site). Jay Currie, via Steyn at NRO “Corner”:
…the way I read this decision is that it imposes a two part test a) are your words offensive and hurtful? b) are you a major media organization with deep pockets represented by serious lawyers. If “a” and not “b” you are a hate monger; if “a” and “b” you are engaged in political debate.
Commenter “Binks” at FreeMarkSteyn:
The ordinary Joe or Jane Canuck is no safer today than last year when this all started. The Human Rights Commissions have probably learned only two things: the internet bites back when bloggers get rolling on an issue; and don’t chew on famous and well-connected targets.
Related posts
In free speech in Canada; Mark Steyn
The Commission should charge itself for violating the Human Rights Law by publishing the full test of the “offending” article as an appendix to its decision.
http://www.steynonline.com/images/rotator/bchrt%20decision.pdf
It’s true that Binks is a “commenter” at FreeMarkSteyn, but he’s more than that: He’s the webmeister. The comment you cited was him quoting himself.
Also, since the BC “Human Rights” Tribunal acquitted Maclean’s and Mark Steyn, Binks has renamed his blog Free Canuckistan! Same URL: http://steynian.wordpress.com/
[...] OVERLAWYERED– Update: B.C. tribunal dismisses Mark Steyn case [...]