77

What “community standards” did this comment breach? #15

I don’t comment on the Guardian anything like as much as I used to, it has become largely pointless due to the massive and dishonest moderation. But the recent spate of rather retro anti-Russian articles caused me a brief bout of sarcasm under this article, headlined:

I thought nothing in Russia could shock me. Then I went to a television broadcast

It’s a forgettable book-plug, neck-deep in condecension, telling the story of how – in horrible evil Russia – there’s a person that tells the audience when to clap and when to stop clapping. The fact this is exactly how television all over the world works is not mentioned.
I posted the following comment:

Natrually, I was immediately called a “putinbot” by the sort of high-minded individuals who, 500 hundred years ago, would have been having epileptics burnt at the stake:

Interestingly, when it came time to remove comments, it wasn’t the abusive response that was removed, but the whole section:

Anyhow…

  • Does it “misrepresent the Guardian and its journalists”?
  • Is it “persistent trolling or mindless abuse”?
  • Is it “spam-like”? Or “obviously commercial”?
  • Is it “racism, sexism, homophobia or hate-speech”?
  • Is it “extremely offensive of threatening?”?
  • Is it “flame-wars based on ingrained partisanship or generalisations”?
  • Is it not “relevant”?

If none of the above – why was it taken down?

see our archive of censored comments. And if you see any egregious examples of the Guardian censoring its “free” comment sections – email us at [email protected], and send us screen caps if possible

Kit Knightly is co-editor of OffGuardian. The Guardian banned him from commenting. Twice. He used to write for fun, but now he's forced to out of a near-permanent sense of outrage.

Filed under: Censored on CiF, Kit, latest

by

Kit Knightly is co-editor of OffGuardian. The Guardian banned him from commenting. Twice. He used to write for fun, but now he's forced to out of a near-permanent sense of outrage.

avatar
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
lundiel
Reader

I got banned for arguing with two odious twerps: fishgirl23 (who’s a bloke) and andypandy1969. Both are rabid remainers who work in conjunction with posho ‘radleyman’, to get any comment they don’t like removed. I think andypandy has mental health issues and ‘fishgirl’ is an unemployed fantasist who writes angry denunciations of people like Johnson and Gove to get upvotes. My point is, it’s all so childish. The debate has disappeared, to be replaced with silly insults which get replies like “I love you fishgirl23″……who’s a man.

HotScot
Reader
HotScot

Try commenting on Climate Change when RockyRex is in the room. Sceptical comments will be disappeared ad hoc. It seems he’s a moderator himself, a former schoolteacher with conventional, fixed views on climate disaster. He will brook no dissent, especially from me, so having been ‘moderated’ once to many times some time ago, I packed it in, I no longer read nor comment on Guardian articles.
Too bad, one less reader for the Guardian, and yet another small nail in its coffin.
Apologies if this has been noted earlier.

Colynn Burrell
Reader
Colynn Burrell

It pretty much mirrored in the Express these days. Any mention of Gina Miller, pro or against is immediately deleted. Commenters of long standing disappear for long periods usually after a posting a well received criticism of MPs from minority groups.
I stopped commenting in the guardian a couple of years ago when it became apparent any anti EU comment was met with little more than a barrage of personal taunts, slurs, jibes, insults and jeers accompanied with almost no constructive responses.

jag37777
Reader

Just been banned again for unstated reasons. I presume it is because I mentioned Ahed Tamimi and Palestinian women imprisoned in Israeli military prisons on the Women’s Day article.
The comments stayed up for quite a while and there were quite a few linked comments (mostly against) but they were wiped out completely a few hours later and I was then besieged by trolls on other threads and my account was disabled shortly after.

Joe corr
Reader
Joe corr

My account on the DE is disabled for much the same reason. It’s hard to get heard anywhere these days.

Robbobbobin
Reader
Robbobbobin

The Guardian’s moderating procedure is basically flawed in several ways detrimental to their “free comment” proposition.
(1) Comments that are removed and marked as such in the comments (“BTL”) section simply disappear from the associated profile, at least for email logins – I don’t know about Disqus logins, but I do know that Disqus itself supports both the marking of removed comments in the users’ profiles as well as BTL and that when the associated users are viewing their own profiles they (can be) shown their original comment in full, as well as the “removed” notice. However, as the Guardian operates, it is impracticable for readers and commenters alike to keep or establish a cross-referenced track of removed comments, making the imputation of inappropriate public utterance and or the traduction of “journalistic reputation” (whether identified or anonymous) very easy for anyone inclined to do those things.
(2) Individual comments are, putatively, removed transparently against an enumerated list of “Community Standards”. But if a comments marked BTL as being removed because they breached one or more of those “Standards”, without specifying which particular, numbered “Standards” prompted their removal (as is the case), then not only is the transparency essential to civilized public discourse also removed for all parties, but – amongst other downsides – casual presumptions of poster reprehensibility as well as unjustified trashings of “journalistic reputation” mentioned above and the exposure of individual moderators to potential, ethics-based “moral hazard” are all facilitated. In many cases, the simple – and, in context, simply – unethical (but not uncommon) total “disappearance” of postings, rather than their “moderated removal“ could be seen as generally preferable, however lacking in transparency it might be. I don’t know if a workload-friendly attachment of moderation “reason numbers” to deleted posts is available as part of Disqus’s functionality, but even if it is not then adding it Guardian-side would be a relatively trivial programming and coding, but disproportionately ethical, exercise.
There are other unsatisfactory aspects of the Guardian’s moderation procedures that are – in context – less than desirable, but just the above two are more than undesirable enough. It becomes less clear, in view of their persistence through year after each successive year of CiF operation, just what the Guardian”s “respect/contempt for its readers” rating really is.

myearlyescape
Reader
myearlyescape

Reminds me of when I got banned from CiF ages ago for commenting on an article about the pregnant asylum seeker in offshore detention who was transferred to Australia for an abortion and then immediately changed her mind about the abortion upon her feet hitting the tarmac in Australia. The Australian Govt had returned her offshore before her lawyer had a chance to urgentpy lodge documents with the Court in an attempt to allow her to stay in Australia. These are the facts which were stated in the Guardian article itself.
My comment merely said words to the effect of “Can’t blame her for trying to create a delay so her lawyer had time to lodge papers in an attempt to stay in Australia but also can’t blame the Aussie Government for preventing her lawyer from exploiting her situation to get around the ban on asylum seekers who arrive by boat from ever staying in Australia.”
I still fail to see which “Community Standard” this comment breached, so I can only conclude it was interpreted as criticism of someone whom the Graun considered to be immune from any hint of criticism whatsoever as a member of several PC minority groups?
On the positive side it was this experience that led me to do a bit of googling on how frequent this kind of over zealous censorship of unwelcome viewpoints (I.E. ‘reality checks’ in many cases) is on CiF which in turn led me to discover this excellent OffGuardian resource where comment really is free!

Mikalina
Reader
Mikalina

Tom Watson, the deputy leader of the Labour Party, went on hunger strike (one day) in support of the Palestinian hunger strikers. Tom is very media savvy. He is also overweight so there were many comments about this – not censured.
I asked if he could inject himself with cholera in solidarity with the children dying in Yemen. That one went pretty quickly.

rizzeh
Reader

The article about Gorbachev.. sorry a book plug about Gorbachev
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jan/11/gorbachev-his-life-and-times-by-william-taubman-review-the-mysteries-remain
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jan/11/gorbachev-his-life-and-times-by-william-taubman-review-the-mysteries-remain#comment-110706200
The comment you requested could not be found.
A very unPC comment i guess, here it goes:
Between 1990 and 1995, an estimated 7 million premature deaths occurred in the countries that emerged from the USSR, rivalling the number of deaths attributed to Stalin’s politically induced famine in 1932–1933. Mortality rates rose by 12.8% in men and life expectancy fell to 64 years in 1994, the lowest level in the post-war period.
http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/the-human-cost-of-economic-policy
He was better at selling PizzaHut, didnt kill as much

Admin
Reader

At the time of writing that comment still seems to be there

jag37777
Reader

I’ve recently rejoined and had a few exchanges on economic matters that went OK. But commenting on a cartoon about Syria invited an attack from one of the resident zionist trolls, “Twinsen”.
Despite being very careful and not reacting in kind to the anti-semite barbs, my posts were variously moderated and/or disappeared and my account put on pre-moderation, The abuse from Twinsen was disappeared altogether but he clearly still has full posting rights.
The manipulation of the conversation by the moderator/s clearly shows a zionist agenda as they’ve made it appear that I was the aggressor having posts moderated for abuse.

A. J. B
Reader
A. J. B

I think they’ve started making comments disappear to disguise the extent of their censorship
I’m having disappearing comments all the time. Yesterday, in the middle of an exchange about anti-semitism in the Labour Party, my reply was censored, There was no sign that I had replied. When I tried to tell the other person that I had replied but was moderated,
that reply disappeared as well. Incredibly frustrating when you’re trying to defend people from false accusations of anti semitism. Meanwhile, the mods had ignored an accusation that if Corbyn won an election, Jews would be asked to leave.
It seemed very ironic that later in the day, in a reply to a Guardian opinion piece which argued that Levinson 2 would interfere with freedom of speech, I suggested that the Guardian practised political censorship. Of course it immediately vanished, as I knew it would.

A. J. B
Reader
A. J. B

Just had a reply from the comments department.
“A moderator might have considered it to be anti-Semitic as it was dismissive of claims of anti-Semitism, and cited your ‘unease’ about the JLM. Community standards advise that we won’t leave up any posts that appear prejudiced:”
Therefore any defence from accusations of anti semitism is anti-semitic!!!!
And unease about any groups activity is suspect.
It really is appalling.

Jay Q
Reader
Jay Q

The level of censorship at the Guardian has reached peak levels – they even removed a direct quote from John F Kennedy the two times I posted it, even though I had provided 2 or 3 links to show where they came from and when he made the statement. References to neo-Nazis and the far right in Ukraine have been vanished almost instantly – they are terrified of people knowing the truth about the coup in Ukraine. They know, as a pro-EU newspaper, that it will not look good to show that the EU played a role, alongside the US and IMF, in staging a coup in a European country. Their anti-Russian hysteria is also, frankly, pathetic.
Censoring historically accurate information because it does not fit the narrative is an incredibly dark and scary thing. The Guardian are not a liberal or left wing newspaper in any sense.

Mikalina
Reader
Mikalina

I asked them if they would have the decency to at least acknowledge that I had posted a reply by showing the comment deleted box. They said that on some threads there are so many comments deleted that it would look odd to do this!!!

Catte
Reader
Catte

if you remember to make screen caps of your posts we can feature any that are unjustly disappeared.

Our Man In Brazil
Reader
Our Man In Brazil

The censorship of opposing views is really getting too much. I’ve been posting on the Graun for many years, and I’ve noted a real crackdown in recent times.
I had a comment removed yesterday from Gary Younge’s article about his extremely underwhelming confrontation with Richard Spencer. I simply pointed out a contradiction in Younge’s discourse, namely that he first claimed membership of the group that suffered slavery and then, a minute later, claimed membership of the group that did the enslaving. I wanted to understand how he resolved that contradiction. It was a genuine question, asked politely, but removed in two minutes flat.
And I saw that plenty of other comments, very few of which could be reasonably said to have breached any of the rules, suffered the same fate. All too common these days, it seems. They have a narrative to push, and they’ll be damned if they allow anyone to contradict or even question it.

Andy Wong
Reader
Andy Wong

I had up to 9 comments moderated this morning on The Graun when I pointed out that the UK’s membership in the EU resulted in it having to take a discriminating immigration policy line against non-EU citizens in the UK (hence motivating me to vote for Brexit last year), and that the current scandal of outsourced workers being exploited by their companies has been heavily enabled in recent years by Freedom of Movement from the EU into the UK. Got slapped with my third pre-moderation stint. Already written in to the Mod Team asking them for a good explanation as to why they seem to be condoning a concerted effort to silence me BTL, and that they can either lift my pre-moderation status or delete my account outright.

Harvey
Reader
Harvey

I’ve come up for air here!!! I thought it was only me. Over the past several years I can’t really count the number of times the Graun’s stasi mod squad has deleted my comments, disabled my comments, placed me on pre-moderation and banned me and my avatar. Oh and then there are those stealthy ‘disappeared’ comments.
The latest censorship twist at the Graun is to simply limit comments to only ONE article . Usually a cotton candy, cream puff issue. They seal off comments on virtually any and all articles that even come close to scratching the surface of crucial issues. Polite comments pointing out this ‘kettling’, so to speak, of comments, the paucity of article that are open for comments are ‘REMOVED’!!!!! And any mention of ‘moderation’, ‘moderators’, ‘community standards’ results in comment ‘REMOVAL’!!!!
Anyhow, got that off me chest!!! And as ol’ Hunter wrote, (and I’m sure he had the likes of K. Murphy at the G. Australia in mind):
As far as I’m concerned, it’s a damned shame that a field as potentially dynamic and vital as journalism should be overrun with dullards, bums, and hacks, hag-ridden with myopia, apathy, and complacence, and generally stuck in a bog of stagnant mediocrity.
Hunter S. Thompson

sabelmouse
Reader
sabelmouse

me too. and i ended up with a new profile.
i don’t think journalism remotely pertains to that corporate sponsored astroturf tabloid. buzzfed is better than that.

sabelmouse
Reader
sabelmouse

i know what standards my latest deleted comment, that sent me straight to premod as well, breached.
being injurious to the possible profits/monopoly of our sponsors.
one of those little ” pharma sometimes is a little bit bad” alibi articles where you’re not allowed to say how very bad they actually are.

Will Forest
Reader
Will Forest

I was banned for a comment simply saying “Mods over moderate and censor opinions” on an article about free speech. Most of my opinions are in line with the Guardian, apart from articles proposing to reverse the democratic referendum vote.

Harry Stotle
Reader
Harry Stotle

Group-think prevails at the Guardian again – today mods are furiously deleting comments that deviate from the corporate definition of ‘fake news’.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/10/fake-news-social-media-current-affairs-approval
What makes it worse is a recent series of articles in which past and present editors say they have been doing a great job policing comments, usually accompanied by a self aggrandising photo-portrait next to the column (with the churnalist looking particularly smug and self-satisfied for some reason).
It is utterly pointless trying to enage with them, although BTL there is always some great stuff, at least until one of the politically programmed moderators censor any point of view not given prior approval by the advertisers.
In these dark days we need a news outlet that is not shit scared of the real issues.
Why does the Guardian tacitly prop up a rotten system then expend so much energy whining about the consequences of abusive elites?

mohandeer
Reader

Because the Guardian is “owned” by pro Zionists and Israel is behind much of the ME atrocities of war being waged by their accomplices. In case you haven’t noticed, the BBC and Channel 4 are also pro establishment which is governed by – Israel and the US elites.
It really is that simple.

AntonyI
Reader
AntonyI

“the Guardian is “owned” by pro Zionists”?
Not during operation Cast Lead 2008-9. Hundreds of articles pro Hamas/Palestinians and anti IDF. This is where the sudden focus on “children” started, which is still being used in anti-Assad rhetoric. There was massive anti-Israel censorship @ CIF.
The videos from Gaza were quite revealing to me and others living in “poor” countries by the way : towering high rise and villas with some damage. Western rich only saw the damage.

Harry Stotle
Reader
Harry Stotle

I don’t know much about Scott Trust Ltd or David Pemsell (who is apparently paid >£700,000) but he’s definitely not getting my fiver until the Guardian drops its policy of censorship, and failing to report honestly on international war crimes.

Jay Q
Reader
Jay Q

Over Christmas the Guardian claimed that they had raised many hundred thousands of pounds for charities – I have yet to see a single article detailing what they have done with all that money. Probably sent it to the ‘rebels in east Aleppo and Asov Battalion in Ukraine.

Mikalina
Reader
Mikalina
Ex Guardian Reader
Reader
Ex Guardian Reader

I have just been banned from the Guardian CiF and I haven’t a clue why. My views are very centre-ground, and I am always polite in my comments. I didn’t even get pre-moderated. Just banned.
I heard of UKIP supporters getting banned, but my narrative was largely aligned with the Guardian, so it is odd they censored me.

sabelmouse
Reader
sabelmouse

that is weird. maybe a mistake? mind you, i’ve had comments deleted that agreed with an article. those underpaid workers are probs exhausted.
they banned me the other week for stating that gardasil is a serial killer of young girls but let me comment again after a few days which i found out accidentally.
don’t know if it was a temporary ban, or mistake.
of course i’ve had comments deleted, and been premoderated plenty.
i like the latter. at least somebody reads my comments 😉

sabelmouse
Reader
sabelmouse

i am being pre moderated again.
The Guardian view on vaccinations: a matter of public health
this morning i find thread already closed, comments and replies deleted.
pathetic!
what a farce this site is. liberal fascism!

Greg Bacon
Reader

You committed a heresy; You spoke the truth, which MSM bird cage liner outfits like the G are allergic to.

rehmat1
Reader
rehmat1

I don’t know the idiot who wrote that Op-Ed and I’m certainly no fan od Vladimir Putin, the Butcher of Chechnya – but I would like writer to judge Putin based on what Rabbi Aleksandr Boroda, president of Russian Federation of Jewish communities, said about Putin: “if Putin is ever removed from power, Russian Jews will be facing serious danger.”
Needless to say that while all leaders of the Christian Western world need Jewish support for their political survival – in Russia, it’s the Jewish community that needs Vladimir Putin for its survival….
https://rehmat1.com/2015/05/07/rabbi-russia-will-be-hell-for-jews-without-putin/

captain Swing
Reader
captain Swing

To be perfectly honest, the fate of Russian Jews is not in doubt. Try the Palestinians.

Kev
Reader
Kev

Whats wrong with Putin, sure he wiped out us/uk backed terrorists in Chechnya – and so he should – good for him

falcemartello
Reader

Its based on verifiable facts
UNO: The anglo-zionist narrative of xenophobia anti slavic nature is all falling apart
IE: The FIFA fiasco has their hands deep into the deception so that rabbit hole of theirs is being exposed in spades
DUE: The sheeple in the west have hit the 16 percent and are verging toward 20 percent in total skeptism with any narrative they try to formulate in their grand scheme of WE ARE EXCEPTIONAL AND THE rUSSIANS ,iRANIANS AND THE CHINESE ARE EVIL PERSONS NON GRATA.
TRE: The Petro-dollar ponzi sheme is coming undone as the Qatari’s are no longer following the anglo-zionist script and will be joining with Iran in constructing a single Pars gas pipeline thru Syria
QAUTTRO:. The Syrian fiasco is coming to an end hence they cannot longer keep up the Narrative ASSAD MUST GO He IS such an evil dictator
CINQUE: Last but not least Docius In Fundem. UKRAINE what a bet noire it has become for the anglo-zionist least of all for the EEU
In chess this is called game set and soon to become match. Petro-dollar waining London cabal proto fascist regime coming under real scrutiny by its citizens and the whole United Europe project unraveling as we speak. The French are going to be for a real shock and awe wuth their Chicago school of economics coming home to hit them were it counts. Labour laws and universal citizen rites being challenged at every sector of society. Macaroni man is their guy and the French fell for it hook line and sinker . Oh well it’s not like they did not know better . They cannot claim ignorance .
Post Scriptum : You cannot make this stuff up any more for more and more sheeple are starting to wise up.
THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES. One could call it the Marie Antionette moment in western fascistic corporate death . Fingers crossed. As Gramsci used to say Trotskyist are the whores of the fascist. Well globalist are modern day Trotskyist.

mohandeer
Reader

Falcemartello
Any chance you could acknowledge that Trotsky was wrongly maligned and certainly misrepresented?
I thought game, set and match was tennis and check/checkmate was chess?
Other than that, couldn’t agree with you more and hopefully we will see a dramatic shift away from the current paradigm and towards a model that actually serves mankind rather than the rich and powerful.

falcemartello
Reader

@Mohander . Not to sure if you can say he was much maligned. I myself am a follower of Gramscian style leftism as apposed to using the term marxism. Gramsci did not believe in rather debunked the famous dictum of Engellian/Marxist paradigm of determinant dailectical materialism. Gramscian form of leftist principle is based on the masses and coming from Italy was based on peasant culture. Hence most of the leftist organisations in Central and South America follow a similar paradigm. IE Chavismo and Guevarian philosophy.
Gramsci had real issues with Trotsky’s philosophical premis and it’s global character. Gramsci was an ardent follower of Gianbattista Vico who believed in the sovereign and how it functioned. Hence sovereign states are all important systems in order to maintain reason and logic with any form of society . Gramsci recognised this and hence his famous essay on hegemony which gets wrongly interpreted by many people in the west. Thats why Gramsci related to Vico’s philosophy of the UNIVERSALITY OF LAW AND CUSTOM’S.
La Nuova Scienza. Is Vico’s book . I suggest you have a read . It is really good and will show you the light. The Other one is Il Nuovo Principe by Antonio Gramsci . Here we see Gramsci moving away from Engellian doctrine.
Cheers

mohandeer
Reader

falcemartello.
Thanks for the response. Have studied some of Marx, trotsky and Lenin and the Russian Revolution(wholly misrepresented by Hearst and Solzenytsin but am intrigued by Gramsci, I have read some of the ideology behind the Chavistas and Guevara, now I will try and wade through alternate thinking.
Susan(Mohandeer)

StAug
Reader

Duh Masses= 50% stupid, 10% evil, 10% noble, 30% UNDECIDED.

Kev
Reader
Kev

Strictly speaking the stupid can also be evil which confuses the figures somewhat, as for the undecided I haven’t made up my mind yet !!!

StAug
Reader

Nice one, Kev!

StAug
Reader

QED

mohandeer
Reader

Reblogged this on Worldtruth and commented:
Yet another example of The Guardian’s egregious moderation of it’s comment is free section.
It’s like visiting a pig farm where all the pigs are wallowing in the mud oinking approval of the quality of slime of which they are all partaking.

sabelmouse
Reader
sabelmouse

that site is embarrassing now. and they want me to pay?!

Manda
Reader
Manda

Are they still begging for subscriptions? Oh dear. I read the print version is going tabloid… most appropriate I think.

tutisicecream
Reader

Yes the Guardian has become a parody of itself. They are begging for money from their readers/customers.
Any business has to first think of the product and not the profit. Secondly they then have to identify their target customers and then provide a service for them. Without a satisfied customer you have no business.
However I think this is all a ruse as they surely receive funding from their most influential customer… The customer who shamed them into smashing their hard drives.
Such a public humiliation by your owner is not something you come back from in the eyes of the public readership… So I think their begging campaign is somewhat trite.

Rev. Spooner
Reader
Rev. Spooner

Going to the Guardian is really embarrassing now. As you say, the hard drive smashing raid by the secret service really got something on their bosses or editors.
I’m not a vindictive person but I find myself wishing that all Guardian journalists and editors end up on the dole or as vagrants. They really do not understand the evil and harm they do to the innocents.

bill40
Reader

I was banned in 2011 I use another moniker there but rarely except to plug my blog. I always though that the Graun was a Labour paper, it isn’t. It’s for well paid public sector professional workers and the left wing of Neo-Liberalism, same agenda but a bit kinder especially for the required busybodies to make it run.

milosevic
Reader
milosevic

the left wing of Neo-Liberalism
That’s what the Labour Party is.
Although the “left” part is wearing a bit thin.

mohandeer
Reader

The Guardian has not been anything but right wing for many years. The only truly honest left wing political reporter – Seumus – was ousted when they tried to tell him how to be more right wing and supportive of the Blairites. It is anti Russian, pro Israeli and very far right of centre.

Dermot O Connor
Reader

It was never a Labour paper. An analysis of the G’s voting endorsements over the years shows a clear bias towards the Liberal party, but definitely not the Labour party (certainly not the left side of the Labour party, in any case).