Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.

Chris Langham and the Oxford Union

Says the Beeb: "The Oxford Union has withdrawn its invitation for actor Chris Langham, jailed for downloading child pornography, to address students. The Bafta award-winner was due to give a talk on 27 May about his conviction and his "vilification" in the media. But the union admitted it had been a "mistake" and said it wanted to avoid protests like those which accompanied BNP leader Nick Griffin last year." Click here for more details.

All well and good. Just one or two questions remain. Why was this widely discredited man, jailed for downloading grade five (the most extreme kind) child pornography, invited to speak at all? And why did the Oxford Union feel the need to give Langham a platform to speak about his entirely deserved "villification" in the media after his conviction? Are the Oxford Union just a bunch of attention seekers or what?

Over to you...
Beep boop. I'm a bot.

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It depends on the speaker and the context I guess. If we believe in the justice system of this country- which accounts for repentance and rehabilitation- then there is nothing wrong per se about having a child pornography offender speaking about his crimes- so long as it is a reflection of it rather than a glorification.

    However if his talk was to concentrate about a perceived vilification by the press, I'd say he probably should have not been invited.

    For the same reasons I don't think they should ever invite someone like Jonathan King or Gary Glitter in, who by the sound of it are unrepentant about it all. Though some people would say even they should be allowed a platform.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Many would see an opportunity to speak at oxford as a great priveledge however, should this be given to offenders for what they have done wrong? It's almost like a reward, in that sense.

    After they've served their time I don't think they should be punished further, but some cash in on their convictions. That MP comes to mind who wrote a book - Jeffrey Archer. Of course nobody would choose to be prison, but for some who do go to prison, they end up receiving certain recompenses which I don't think they should.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Jesus Christ, who's replacing him? Heather Mills?

    I thought that it was a platform for genuine debate and lectures on real issues, but based on the other people invited to speak (Jodie Marsh, Geri Halliwell, David Cameron), it's really just a celebrity interview. Based on that, I wouldn't have had a problem with it, but why the fuck would anyone go to these talks to hear nobodies rant about their own experiences? I watch TV interviews for that.
Sign In or Register to comment.