Behind the Mask, a documentary about the Animal Liberation Front, has been screening around the world to very positive reviews. But a recent screening in the UK prompted a councillor to say the event may be a “criminal offense.” According to Leamington Spa Today, the local paper:
…Coun Roger Copping (Lib Dem, Leamington Manor) said: “I am Warwick district health champion and I have worked for the National Health Service. I can see the need for animal experimentation to save people’s lives, if there is no overt cruelty. I am in favour of animal experimentation.
“If this film is promoting terrorism against firms and breaking the law I am against that. If it is recruiting people to do anything illegal I think it would be a criminal offence to show it.”
Not surprisingly, the councillor linked his support for animal experimenation to his concerns with “promoting terrorism.” In the UK, much like here, terrorism has become defined not by the action, but by the ideology behind the action.
What I find so disturbing about this, as a reporter, is the potential criminalization of pure speech. At a time when terms like “eco-terrorism” and “eco-terrorist” are used so recklessly in the press, documentaries like this are even more crucial: people can see the “other side” (I hate that term, because of course there are multiple sides in this debate), and come to a more informed conclusion about whether rescuing animals from labs can be equated with flying planes into buildings. There’s a media blackout of opposition to this corporate scare-mongering, and outside voices should be protected, not snuffed out.
I’d make this argument for a documentary on any controversial political topic. It’s a pretty conservative stance, I know, but when in doubt I think it’s better to allow people to come to their own conclusions, rather than censor.