THERE has been an interesting debate on Twitter this week (and who knew the words ‘interesting’ and ‘Twitter’ would ever be used in the same sentence?) between a Newport city councillor and the campaigners Save Newport Art.

The latter is using social media to highlight what they believe to be a co-ordinated attack on arts and culture by the council.

The former – Labour councillor Emma Corten – was unsurprisingly defending the council’s policy that has seen libraries closed and the programme of temporary art exhibitions at Newport Museum brought to an end.

The debate – I use the term loosely as it was really an argument – centred on whether the Argus was censored by the council over our coverage of the final temporary exhibition and the demonstration outside the museum that marked it.

I didn’t enter the debate but I will now. Was this newspaper censored by the council on this issue?

Well, let’s look at the facts.

We reported, with pictures, the protest that took place outside the museum on Saturday morning.

There was no attempt by the council or anyone else to stop us doing so. If there had been, you would have read about it.

We reported on the exhibition by David Garner with his reaction to the ending of temporary exhibitions to save £40,000. We also ran quotes froma leading art critic condemning the council, and a comment fromthe council defending its actions.

There was no attempt by the council or anyone else to stop us doing any of this. If there had been, you would have read about it.

So that’s all simple enough so far.

We reported both sides of the argument with no attempt from anyone to stifle us. No censorship.

But here’s where it gets tricky.

We asked if we could take pictures of Mr Garner’s exhibition inside the museum. The message came back from council leader Bob Bright that we were not allowed to do so. No reason was given for this refusal.

Councillor Bright has every right to say no to us. The museum is a council-owned building and we need permission to film inside it, as we would at a hospital or a factory.

Is it censorship? Probably not. Is it a peculiar decision? Definitely.

There appears to be absolutely no logic attached to the decision. Why not let us take pictures? The artist was happy for us to do so. Indeed, he sent us images of his exhibits when he heard we were not being allowed in.

It might even have encouraged a few more people to visit the exhibition.

Without a reason being offered, we cannot imagine why our photographer was not allowed inside the museum.

I do not believe we were censored as such, simply the victims of a poor decision.

But I can guarantee Save Newport Art and all our readers that if the city council or any other public body ever attempted to censor this newspaper there would be hell to pay.

And our readers would be the first to know about it.