Censored on CiF, community standards, latest
Comments 56

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 editor@off-guardian.org, and send us screen caps if possible

56 Comments

  1. Our Man In Brazil says

    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.

    Like

    • Andy Wong says

      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.

      Like

  2. Harvey says

    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

    Like

    • sabelmouse says

      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.

      Like

  3. sabelmouse says

    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.

    Like

  4. Will Forest says

    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.

    Like

    • Harry Stotle says

      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?

      Liked by 1 person

      • 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.

        Like

        • Harry Stotle says

          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.

          Liked by 1 person

  5. Ex Guardian Reader says

    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.

    Liked by 1 person

    • sabelmouse says

      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 😉

      Like

  6. sabelmouse says

    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!

    Liked by 1 person

  7. rehmat1 says

    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/

    Like

    • Kev says

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

      Like

    • captain Swing says

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

      Like

  8. 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.

    Liked by 1 person

    • 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.

      Like

      • @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

        Liked by 1 person

        • 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)

          Like

  9. 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.

    Liked by 1 person

    • 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.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Manda says

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

      Liked by 2 people

  10. 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.

    Liked by 1 person

    • 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).

      Liked by 1 person

    • 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.

      Liked by 1 person

  11. Kit you’re right it’s another plug for a book a “G-Lab” piece dressed up as journalism. Harding anyone?

    The piece itself is totally Hardingesque: plugging a book, sensationalist, full of misdirections and untruths.

    Roxburgh, Mentions the anti Putin demonstrations, was he there? Were they really so big? The one I saw in Ekaterinburgh was tiny, I’ve seen bigger pensioner demos here.

    But hang on he got arrested in Nizhny Novgorod for, er WORKING while travelling on a tourist visa. Always a problem for you if you think you might be high profile with the police in any country. It is a visa violation. As he admits himself, “My job as in-house “expert” was to lead the discussions and help the participants get a feel for Putin’s Russia.” Clearly an idiot. Hardingesque or what?

    And then he was invited to Anatoly Kuzichev Studio 1 political talk show on Channel One To, er sit in the audience? Big deal. I watched the programme and it was actually about Russian War graves and memorials being both desecrated and torn down in Poland and Ukraine. It was only communist symbols because of the historical period. And why are they now being banned there, in Poland and Ukraine? Roxburgh, doesn’t bother to tell us. Well, maybe it’s something to do with the rise of Fascism in these two countries. So you can imagine if it’s explained properly to you how you could begin see how the Russian’s and a war veteran like Artyom Sheinin might get a little hot under the collar. (29 million Russian’s died fighting Fascism!)

    The Guardian’s Russo-phobia is legend and more insidious than other news rags because it pretends to be liberal and progressive. Yet somehow it manages to espouse a racist and mono-cultural view of Russia, a position it so much condemns in others and on other issues.

    Strangely, as Roxburgh’s article exemplifies in spades, when it comes to Russia cross-cultural understanding goes out the window at the Guardian. In fact the opposite occurs and he actively condones and promotes a Russo-phobic view.

    Why is this with the Guardian? Well some of it is, as with CNN, for the ratings/views/click bait. But also its an ideological problem as they now subscribe to a world view which is unipolar, liberal academic and elitist. So many Oxbridge types these days in its ranks, its unbelievable.

    But also its an increasing world view which is purely Anglo-centric and false. The falsity lies in its desire totally these days to follow the establishments narrative. A view most of its readers don’t actually subscribe to and never did.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Kaiama says

      I read the piece. It was a straight forward visa violation. End of. What the person was doing was NOT tourism. The rest of it was just dishonest.

      Liked by 2 people

  12. Peter Schmidt says

    Same thing happens to me all the time. However the Guardian is not as popular when I first started commenting on the Syrian crisis 5 years ago. There are hardly any story that we can comment on, apart from Brexit.
    In that rate pretty soon commenting will only be allowed on local issues.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Brutally Remastered says

      Ah yes, one of the marvellous and completely surprising effects of Globalisation, parochialism. The groundswell of this are the comments that link any subject to football, they may not be many yet at The Grauniad but they are coming. I stopped going to that Zionist rag/erag so I do not know.

      Liked by 1 person

  13. Dead World Walking says

    The young, thinking voters of Britain have put a tiger amongst the vultures with their resounding support for Jeremy Corbyn.
    The vultures are looking for ‘carrion’ wherever they can find it.

    Liked by 2 people

  14. writerroddis says

    Good response, Kit, to Orientalimp. As zerohoursuni I too have been called a Putinbot, asked how the weather is in Moscow etc et-yawn-cetera.

    I agree about the dishonesty of Graun moderation. I had three comments removed last week. None breached any of the stated rules but each contained a single URL to a different and relevantpost on my own manifestly not</>commercial blogsite.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. bevin says

    There is more to it than this-The Guardian is certainly pursuing a political agenda-but underlying all is the unfortunate fact that our species is plagued by the sort of authoritarian personalities who gravitate towards positions such as those of Policeman, Prison Guard, Inquisitor or moderator of blogs.
    There is something about such people that triggers their reactions. They are, first and foremost, conformists: they don’t notice heresy when it is wearing a suit and tie and speaking in an approved accent, they will often miss things that contradict everything that their employers stand for but they pounce on anything that appears to contains anything savouring of originality or novelty in analysis. It is that which frightens them and that fear is the reason that they volunteer to police others’ thoughts.

    Liked by 4 people

    • That is an excellent observation, and one I don’t often see when these things come up. Sadly, it doesn’t take much to get someone on the side of the angels to behave pretty much the same way. Which accounts for the fact that the expression of heretical views descends into cattiness and tribalism on both sides with alarming regularity. Which, in turn, gives squirrel-cheeked moderators chewing bon-bons and doing god’s work perfect cover to banish any dissenting analyses that might threaten the orthodoxies they’ve been contracted to promote.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Brian Burgess says

      @Bevin – Police people are actually a diverse bunch these days and many of them these days are not police “men.” Some of them are actually very interesting, creative and deep thinking people with a genuine desire to help people. Please don’t sully the image of Police people by comparing them to the Guardian’s appalling moderators.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Really miss your opinions on Craig’s blog – he’s made a bit of a plumb of himself over his big Le Penn flounce off. Typical liberal behaviour that was too.

      Like

  16. 0use4msm says

    The “Putinbot” accusers don’t have valid arguments so they use ad hominems to poison the well. If the whole poisoned well of debate gets moderated indiscriminately as a result then their job is done. All the better when all traces of their provocation are removed.

    Liked by 1 person

    • UKIP spend 1/2 a million quid on paid trolls, so does Campbell’s Portland Communications, and the Tories closer to 2 million, it seems they all now congregate on cif, and between the three of them no one else gets a look in. I believe they stay there because it’s too hard to AstroTurf via Twitter, Corbyn supporters mantra of “block don’t bicker” seem to put pay to Campbell’s sock puppet saving labour pretty damned quickly, Portland commas spent a fortune paying overseas organisations to troll Labour members with the exact opposite effect to those planned. I guess Astroturfing can only be successful when it doesn’t have a real grassroots movement to contend with, paid trolls cannot possibly have access to the vast political knowledge it would require to undermine genuine political struggle.

      Liked by 2 people

  17. labrebisgalloise says

    I don’t bother any more. It doesn’t matter what I say, it gets moderated so I presume I’ve become an unperson and some bot is automatically deleting my comments. I won’t waste any more time. Any time I might have spent previously on btl comments is now devoted to spreading the word that this journal is utterly toxic, much more so than the Mail or Express, which are like having acid thrown in your face. This is something much more insidious that pollutes your soul slowly whilst you are sleeping and tries to sow doubt and to turn your friends against you. So, no more comments – a wooden stake driven straight through the heart is the only riposte now.

    Liked by 3 people

  18. Brian Harry, Australia says

    The Off-guardian is guilty of removing articles it doesn’t agree with as well Kit.

    Like

      • Brian Harry, Australia says

        I got ‘moderated for using “actual” quotes by Israeli politicians(their words, not mine), so when the Off Guardian is playing “Holier than Thow”, it is they who are just as bad as The Guardian, ie, hypocrites.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Frank Lodge says

          So you can’t actually produce any evidence (or indeed any correct grammar or spelling). Maybe some clue as what you said and when it was moderated might improve your credibility?

          Like

          • Turn on the Comments says

            Your request is not going to be met is it?
            How can one prove one was a comment was moderated on O.G.org as it is removed without trace.

            Like

        • Did you use quote marks, because I have posted statements by Ayelet Shaked and never been warned off? It might well have been you failed to make it clear that you did not share the vicious remarks made by Israeli extremist quotes?

          Like

          • Brian Harry, Australia says

            Whenever I use a quote, I always us quotemarks, to indicate that it is a quote, and I always add the name of who made the quote so that it can be verified.

            Like

    • I encourage everyone who reads us to make screenshots of their comments here; that way, they can later post the screenshot of what they claim we removed. So far, no one who claims we censor their comments (by my count, it’s two people so far) has provided any evidence of it.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Brian Harry, Australia.
      You have posted comments before(possibly elsewhere) and seemed well grounded, so this is a strange comment to be reading from you. Several people have had problems posting on the site but it is invariably a technical issue not on OffG’s end.
      The only time I have ever seen it is when a troll is being repeatedly abusive and even then he was advised to moderate his ad hom attacks. The particular article was one I totally disagreed with and let it be known, but I wan’t warned off and certainly wasn’t censored. You should really justify the accusation, because I find it very difficult to accept on face value.

      Like

.....................

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s