Originally Posted by
vibguy
It is more or less normal that BA blocks sites which are not 100% guaranteed in favour of BA and which are beyond their control. An argument used a lot in FT threads and in favour of BA blocking FT: in Turkey much more sites are blocked by the government (in other words : it is worse elsewhere).
Is this meant to be sarcasm? I hardly think BA would promote the Daily Mail of all papers if they were actively censoring anti-BA stories!