62

What “community standards” did this comment breach? #17

The following comments – sent in by one of our readers, 0use4msm – were censored by the Guardian. Which of the well-publicised CiF “community standards” did they breach?

Removed comments, posted under the opinion piece “Aggression, abuse and addiction: we need a social media detox”:

The article was published at 6.00am yesterday morning – August 4th – its comment section was closed by 4pm.

Screen shot of where they used to be:

  • Do they “misrepresent the Guardian and its journalists”?
  • Are they “persistent trolling or mindless abuse”?
  • Are they “spam-like”? Or “obviously commercial”?
  • Are they “racism, sexism, homophobia or hate-speech”?
  • Are they “extremely offensive of threatening?”?
  • Are they “flame-wars based on ingrained partisanship or generalisations”?
  • Are they 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

avatar
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Razzer Dazzer
Reader
Razzer Dazzer

The Guardian of what, their own myopic Extreme-Left-Feminist tunnel-vision.

Patrick Mahony
Reader
Patrick Mahony

I hate HMG trolling. The Guardian reported on the 77th Brigade being set up to influence and disrupt social media – and then allow them free reign with anti Brexit, Trump, Corbyn, Russia agenda.
Basically anything that may undermine the MIIC is fair game. Hold another view – breach community standards.

Martin Usher
Reader
Martin Usher

To be fair to the Guardian I’ve had literally thousands of posts over the years, ever since CiF started, and very few have been censored. I don’t work for MI5, the CiA or even the KGB, I’m just someone who grew up with the Guardian — or rather, the Manchester Guardian, and appreciated its ‘publish and be damned’ attitude. (Mind you, if anyone’s prepared to pay me…..well…who am I to refuse free money?)

Its also true, though, that comments have been increasingly restricted and censored over the last few years. Its got to the point where the site’s become unreadable. I used to complain about technical changes that gummed the site up — their need to monetize their website degraded the performance of their web offering — but that was a minor nuisance compared to the wholesale censorship that goes on these days. Its as if the publication has been taken over by a cabal of ex-student union types, the sort that have very fixed ideas about the world and will instantly ‘no platform’ anyone who might even think of disagreeing with them. This change has also manifest itself as a subtle change in the paper’s politics; normally it would defend someone like Corbyn to the death (for example) even if it disagreed strongly with them, taking the line that while it “might disagree with what you’re saying it will defend your right to say it”. Liberal stuff. Not any more; its really difficult to figure the paper out now. The only reason for reading it at all is Martin Rowson.(and I swear he only gets away with it because his drawings have such deep structure it passes over the heads of the censors).

Carmel MacIntyre
Reader

To Muggwump, 11m ago: I watched Channel 4 News when that story broke, and was informed that the guy who stood up to make an anti-Israel remark was a Holocaust survivor: iI didn’t have to trawl social media (thankfully) to find that out.

Frankly Speaking
Reader
Frankly Speaking

“So what you’re saying is” that Channel 4 is a neutral and reliable source of reporting?!

How’s your friend there Cathy Newman getting on, is she still employed by them following her catastrophic attempt to attack a Clinical Psychologist a few months ago in what has now become famous after it went viral?

tutisicecream
Reader

It’s “hard to drive” home the importance of liberal enablers to the establishment. Those political shape-shifters who appear to say freedom of expression should go uncensured… until you disagree with them. They turn out to be the first to cave and first to kill decent.

Just see how their support for Julian Assange has evaporated.

lundiel
Reader

I completely agree. It was brought home to me by the referendum result. People who identified as centre left (who I would identify as Liberal left) became so incensed at the referendum result that, after years of castigating right wingers for sneering at the working class, they suddenly became certain that the working class “were not educated enough to know what they were voting for”. I suddenly found these people”Wetherspoons” became a favourite adjective to describe working class leave voters. The Guardian, Channel 4 News and the Independent are the vanguard of this political movement that is definitely not left wing.

Harry Stotle
Reader
Harry Stotle

If the Guardian had to list their values in relation to the treatment of Assange I would imagine the twin hydra of imperialism and neoliberalism would come first, identity politics second, and lagging some way behind would be those few souls brave enough to reveal to the rest of us how the machinations of power actually play out.

The Guardian have not just abandoned a whistle blower but at the drop of a hat call in their fatuous anti-Assange experts (Marina Hyde and James Bell) to either further ridicule him or divert attention from Britains ongoing complicity with the neocon agenda.

Mulga Mumblebrain
Reader
Mulga Mumblebrain

The Fraudian sewer didn’t just ‘abandon’ Assange, but, the feminazi harridans in particular, turned on him like a lynch-mob. Yet more evidence of what nasty swine the entire coven is.

Francis Lee
Reader
Francis Lee

Now what was it that Yevtuschenko said: Oh yes, I remember,

”When truth is replaced by silence, the silence is a lie.”

Get that Guardian, sin is not only by action, but also by omission.

Frankly Speaking
Reader
Frankly Speaking

I no longer take screen shots of my comments there because they very rarely get deleted now, I’ve been politically “chilled “ as in the “chilling effect “.

I closed my main account in disgust after getting constantly deleted, but a few months later opened a new one for football commenting only. I occasionally drift into political commenting, old habits die hard, and now i recollect one comment was modded out so i just went back to inane footie rambling, dumbed down, neutered.

I now have a third account which i use just for my anti Brexiteer loons, anti-fascist (avoiding any comments on Netanyahu) measured arguments and hey presto, they seem to still fit with the Guardian’s Ministry Of Truth requirements ;o)

I find it amazing what is allowed though.
I don’t like Trump, but wanting Trump killed is fine BTL at the Guardian and not considered as potentially the legal offence of incitement. Perhaps that’s what the Deep State will do to him, knock him off, and the Guardianistas, Huffers, CNN, WaPo etc will be weeping with joy.

Smitty
Reader
Smitty

Yes, yes. With a bit of innovation and ingenuity it is actually possible to maintain multiple identities in the Graun censor comment void. An interesting weakness to exploit is the ‘Report’ function. Lots of fun there. You can send special messages to your favourite Shawnee Walker fake journo or to those automated (?) Mods. HA!!

Lately, fewer and fewer ‘articles’ seem to be now open for comment. Hmmmmm.

Frankly Speaking
Reader
Frankly Speaking

I said earlier –
“I find it amazing what is allowed though. I don’t like Trump, but wanting Trump killed is fine BTL at the Guardian…the Guardianistas, Huffers, CNN, WaPo etc will be weeping with joy.”

Here’s the actual comment someone made there, about 2 weeks ago, it’s still there, shocking –

“I’d happily see Trump dead. Delighted, in fact. The world would be instantly a better place.”

Robbobbobin
Reader
Robbobbobin

Shocking about Trump by some random commenter in the Guardian, not so much about Saddam, Muammar et al by senior government figures on prime time tv?

Antonyl
Reader
Antonyl

As anti Brexit rants are de rigueur ATL & BTL at the Graun it looks like international deep super state won the battle from UK’s national deep state in the UK MSM. You might be in deep foreign shit. Luckily the Brits have shown not all to be Molly sheep (like May, Macron, Mark R. Michel, Merkel )

Frankly Speaking
Reader
Frankly Speaking

Not sure about that. I have a completely different view of the EU to you and many here, let me try and explain why.

I actually lived in the UK before and when it joined the EEC and I lived through its progression to the EU. Before we joined, the UK was in really deep shit. No government really knew what they were doing. Life was tough for the average Brit.

I also travelled through Eastern Europe when it was under the Iron Curtain, it was far worse than the UK was. Travelling through Germany, Netherlands, France, Italy was a completely contrast.

For the great majority of Europeans, including Brits, joining the EEC / EU has improved the conditions in their countries and their lives dramatically in many ways. I can’t fully explain why, but a lot of the good things that advanced EU countries were doing seems to have rubbed oof on Britian and other pooer countries, and certainly free trade and free movement of people and capital has been a massive benefit, helping the UK rise to become the 5th or 6th most successful economy in the world.

However, I admit that the Euro currency project might have been a step too far, or that certain countries should never have been let in to the Eurozone.

Some countries such as Greece had their own problems such as non-collection of taxes, fiddling the books, and which is easier to blame the EU for by their own inept governments. Same goes for the UK, the Tories have always blamed the EU for everything which in fact they were themselves responsible for – even the nonsense about a blue versus burgundy passport was a UK decision on a EU recommendation, not a EU requirement. Opening the doors to millions of eastern Europeans 10 years ahead of most other countries was a UK government decision to get cheap labour, not an EU requirement. Etc, etc, etc.

Despite a few issues, all of them fixable, I maintain that over it’s lifetime, the EU has been a great social and economical and human / political achievement, albiet imperfect, and a huge benefit to the vast majority of Europeans. In fact, it became so successful, it threatened the US economically and financially, hence it is, as Trump puts it, his “foe”. The EU has also taken privacy and monopoly abuses by US companies such as Google, Microsoft and Facebook seriously, so another threat to US neoliberal hegemony.

In fact, Trump and his necons view the EU as being a socialist organisation, yet most people here regard it as being a right wing project, which I have to say is nonsensical from a historical perspective, in my opinion. The only true part about the latter point is that yes, the neoliberals are indeed trying to influence and seize control of the EU, but having failed at that, they are now breaking it down and they will use NATO as their imperial umbrella as they fragment the EU.

Let’s also not forget that it’s not more than 10 years ago that the were serious discussions about Russia joining the EU. The Americans would never allow a competitor stretching from Lisbon all the way across to Vladivostok, no way. It would also have had a potential to link up with China in the future and the rest of Asia, i.e. the Shanghai agreement countries.

If you want to keep doing the US neoliberals dirty work for them and happy to see the EU destroyed and even major war on our continent, please go ahead, but I won’t play any part in it.

Robbobbobin
Reader
Robbobbobin

“For the great majority of Europeans, including Brits, joining the EEC / EU has improved the conditions in their countries and their lives dramatically in many ways.”

The development of the EU through its various successor treaties from the original ECSC treaty (of Paris in 1951) onwards was the first part, in Western Europe, of a general, economic recovery from a devastating war that would have occurred anyway but that received a financially and psychologically valuable boost from the Marshall Plan (1948-1951), so that by 1957, when the first successor to Paris (Rome) was signed to form the next incarnation (the EEC) the first flowering of post-war optimism was in full swing (you might remember the celebration of its seeding in the 1951 Festival of Britain). That was the Western Europe through which you travelled and marvelled. On the other hand, the Soviet Union was not only excluded from such international business-friendly government reseeding but under continual existential threat from a rabid west, in response to which it had to trim all the consumerism that “trickled down” across Western Europe in favour of militarily-assured survival based on its own resources alone. In that light, Soviet economic development from the 1920s to the 1950s was easily equal to if not better than that of West. That was the externally imposed austerity you travelled through behind the Iron Curtain. Finally, from Nixon’s abandonment of the gold standard in 1971 unleashed the full forces of business-friendly (now corporation-dominated) goverment (one of the definitions of fascism) into the service of a developing globalization (which is superstate nationalism and absolutely not any form of internationalism), and that is the golden age Western Europe now basks in (or did, until 2008, when the viability of the underlying system was seriously called into question this time around, and 2016, when anxiety over the intentions of the goose set in). “Golden age”, that is, for only a select few Western-axis expanding states, and increasingly few citizens in those states). For some inexplicable reason, Jeremy Corbyn has never spelled out the basis of his caution about the wisdom of superstatehood (but nor have his surrounders), nor have any of them explained the difference between globalization and internationalism. Travel broadens the mind only if you pack a wide angle lens in your camera bag.

Ure Kismet
Reader
Ure Kismet

For me the worst of the guardian’s tyrannical censorship is the complete lack of any sense of humour about those total twats.
I’m once again ‘under moderation’ for a comment I posted yesterday under a particularly prissy and self congratulatory article some bloke by the name of Luke Jennings wrote about a spy story of his which has been made into a (IMHO) extremely boring self-reverent TV show. The article which rambles on about how ‘Luke’ is the Guardian dance critic is here:
https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2018/aug/05/killing-eve-how-my-psycho-killer-was-brought-to-life-luke-jennings

I didn’t bother to take a screenshot of my comment since I thought it was amusing without being too over the top.
Anyway it went:
“Is that the ‘Luke” Guardian journo who has another gig at MI6 or have is that another Luke, some other Fleabag?”

It was hardly the stuff to cop a wet bus ticket slap of censorship, the fact it did plus got me pre-moderated indicates to me at least, maybe that ‘other Luke’ does have something to hide.

I gave up commenting on Mr Corbyn or apartheid israel in that fishwrap long ago, chiefly because all that happens when reading the graun on either subject is that steam comes whistling out me ears, plus there never seems to be any comments open under either of those topics. The fact that one story did allow them meant that they were gonna police the fuck outta it and had already worded up hasbara trolls and tory astroturfers to contribute, meaning you unintentionally end up being a part of their tendentious nonsense.

Maggie
Reader
Maggie

@ Ure Kismet
And here is your proof…
Israel pays students to post pro Israel comments in newspaper sand social media
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/students-offered-grants-if-they-tweet-pro-israeli-propaganda-8760142.html

In a campaign to improve its image abroad, the Israeli government plans to provide scholarships to hundreds of students at its seven universities in exchange for their making pro-Israel Facebook posts and tweets to foreign audiences.
The students making the posts will not reveal online that they are funded by the Israeli government, according to correspondence about the plan revealed in the Haaretz newspaper.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office: The government’s hand is to be invisible to the foreign audiences. Daniel Seaman, the official who has been planning the effort, wrote in a letter on 5 August to a body authorising government projects that “the idea requires not making the role of the state stand out and therefore it is necessary to adhere to great involvement of the students themselves, without political linkage or affiliation”.
According to the plan, students are to be organised into units at each university, with a chief co-ordinator who receives a full scholarship, three desk co-ordinators for language, graphics and research who receive lesser scholarships and students termed “activists” who will receive a “minimal scholarship”.

Mulga Mumblebrain
Reader
Mulga Mumblebrain

I watched five minutes of that ‘Eve’ tripe, and was surprised, which I am not often these days in regards to these matters, by the sheer vicious, racist, insanity of the Russophobic shite. If, say, a MOSSAD, killer was portrayed in such a manner, and her controllers as savage inhumane animals. I rather think that the Fraudian scum would be going ape-shit and hurling their ‘journalistic’ faeces about.

Antonyl
Reader
Antonyl

The Guardian of the Establishment galaxy censored unwanted comments on “climate change” much earlier; not just deleting comments but vanishing them completely and permanently blocking selected commenters. The above are “lucky bastards”.
Welcome to The mono culture view little pony world.
Our View is sacred, facts be damned. Normally called Religion.

Mulga Mumblebrain
Reader
Mulga Mumblebrain

Well, at least the ‘Fraudian’ still gets that one right. Arguing for human extinction is a bridge too far, even for the Fraudian.

Admin
Reader

You don’t think the fact man-made global warming is being promoted by the same outlet that – in everything else – is the voice of the neoliberal extremists is even slightly a reason to question its validity?

Why would the mouthpiece of the Establishment be radical and truth-based in this one area?

Mulga Mumblebrain
Reader
Mulga Mumblebrain

The proposition that the support of the Fraudian for the anthropogenic climate destabilisation theory, somehow negates the opinions of ALL the Academies of Science and ALL the scientific societies of the planet, and >99% of actively publishing climate scientists, is far, far, far beyond bizarre. But when it is still expectorated as the entire Northern Hemisphere bakes and burns in an unprecedented heatwave, and as record floods and deluges occur worldwide, as the Arctic sea ice melts away, as the Gulf Stream rapidly weakens secondary to Greenland ice melt, as eastern Australia is gripped by a record drought etc, etc, etc, it becomes utterly lunatic, and in my opinion, criminal.

Frankly Speaking
Reader
Frankly Speaking

I’m old enough to remember campaigns against global warming by many small organisations who were passionate about saving the environment, well before governments or the UN got involved. Independent scientists and ecologists were warning us ages ago and they were laughed off as clueless or nutters.

Then NASA began to use its great technology to confirm that climate was changing and that spurred many governments and the UN into action and resulted in the Kyoto agreement.

It’s way beyond all reasonable doubt that we have a major climatic problem, which incidentally i think is mainly due to the vast deforestation across the tropical belt and elsewhere. It’s not some big business NWO conspiracy, it’s reality.

That’s not to say that big business and governments will object to cashing in on trying to deal with global warming, but that’s a separate matter to the actual science and empirical data performed well before this lot noticed it was a real problem and they could earn from it too.

Mulga Mumblebrain
Reader
Mulga Mumblebrain

Anthropogenic climate destabilisation is overwhelmingly caused by the emissions of greenhouse gases caused by the combustion of fossil fuels. That is the primary forcing. The destruction of forests is a secondary, if still gigantic, catastrophe, one that certainly exacerbates many other ecological crises, such as biodiversity loss. And anthropogenic climate destabilisation is directly causing mass tree death, worldwide, through the warming of tropical forests, and their death and conversion to savannah, and in the spread of pest species, like the pine beetles that have devastated North American forests.

Frankly Speaking
Reader
Frankly Speaking

Indeed, and the two are entirely linked. Forests are our planet’s lungs in reverse, they absorb (sequester) vast amounts of CO2 and generate oxygen. Destroying these reverse-lungs is utter madness.

As you point out, there are other benefits of trees / forests too as they help to regulate temperature, local climates, weather patterns and ultimately even global climate. Here’s a few other benefits –

Just 1 tree can absorb CO2 at a rate of 22kg / 48 lb per annum.
Trees are natural pollution filters, absorbing pollutants through their leaf surface.
Trees lower temperature by breathing out water and providing shade from the sun; the difference in temperature can be as much as 10C / 19F.
Trees reduce erosion of soil and help to avoid flooding downstream.
Trees help to replenish ground water and maintain the flow of streams.
Trees provide wildlife habitats.
Managed forests can provide employment to communities and significant socio-economic benefits.

We are killing ourselves and the planet by ignoring the problems of de-forestation and not actively participating in re-forestation.

Jim Scott
Reader
Jim Scott

The Guardian once posted articles that were above criticism. They now escape criticism by their immoderation policy.
Where once they flew above the slings and arrows their new avoidance tactic is to crawl below criticism.

frank
Reader
frank

But today, one could comment on a piece about bananas. Important stuff.

tutisicecream
Reader

Ha, ha, ha… don’t make me laugh! You have to be bananas to believe their sh*t!

Chris
Reader
Chris

One of the bases that the Guardian is banning people from commenting or removing their comments is their claim that some comments or commenters reduce the credibility of Guardian articles and journalists.

They have the problem if this is so easy to do with only a few words or a joke.

“comments make our journalism better. At their worst, they can diminish its impact, reduce its credibility, and harm our writers and their subjects, while making those constructive comments impossible to find or recognise.”

“But where there is positivity, constructive criticism, reasonable debate and – crucially – where journalists respond and get involved, there is a huge amount to be gained. Our audience tells us when we get it right, as well as when we get it wrong.”

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/jan/31/comments-audience-censorship-criticism

A Benge
Reader
A Benge

‘But where there is positivity, constructive criticism, reasonable debate’

raucous laughter.!!!………try being reasonable about demented Corbyn stalker Nick Cohen.
In the days when a response to him was allowed, any absolutely reasonable defence against his
pathological spite would result in getting pre-modded. They’re not doing him any good
allowing him to rant without any boundaries. The level of obsessive hate he feels for one
harmless individual is definitely bordering on a sickness.

Mulga Mumblebrain
Reader
Mulga Mumblebrain

Cohen, in my opinion, is a war criminal in the mould of Streicher due to his rabid support for the aggression and genocide in Iraq in 2003. I really hope that, somehow, he faces justice for that crime, one day.

Jen
Reader
Jen

We certainly know when The Fraudian gets it wrong: when the BTL comments forum landscape resembles Hiroshima on 7 August 1945.

Dungroanin
Reader
Dungroanin

Chris – That was 2016 – before deploying their new tactics – i bet they wouldn’t do a similar exercise today. Robustness is not allowed. Criticising ‘journalists’ is not allowed. Pointing out PR is not allowed. Talking about moderation is not allowed – it is demented fight club rules. Mods sit in a different building. No senior manager or director is named as being in charge of their actions.

Playing wakkamod is the only fun available!

Gwyn
Reader
Gwyn

”The relentless anti-Putin hysteria and general Russophobia would be funny (in how childish and pathetic it all is) were it not for the fact that the situation is so potentially dangerous.”

This little comment of mine was not to the Guardian’s mods’ liking. Not even worthy of a ”This comment was removed…”. They sent it straight down the memory hole, the touchy little buggers.

Jen
Reader
Jen

I see just from reading the comments alone, and not clicking on the link to the actual Fraudian article, that the person who wrote the article was Mr Freeze himself (Jonathan Freedland to the rest of you).

See, just as the original Mr Freeze (in the Batman comics) cannot tolerate normal temperatures and must live permanently in a special suit to maintain his metabolism at sub-zero temperatures, so The Fraudian’s resident Mr Freeze must wrap himself in the special invisible cotton-wool spun by The Fraudian’s own freakshow self-aggrandizing propaganda propped up by his fellow clown stenographer colleagues and BTL moderators.

Any semblance of reality that penetrates the eggshell-thin skin of the cotton-wool enveloping Mr Freeze endangers his sanity and reason for living so it must be blasted away as soon as it is detected. Hence the BTL moderators went straight into ultra-red-level emergency mode to pressure-hose the comments the moment the BTL comments forum opened. But after 10 hours the equipment and the programs – though of as high a level of AI that can be deployed but indiscriminately used and hastily repaired over and over without a complete overhaul – finally broke down for the last time and could not be revived.

One wonders why the BTL comments forums are even open now for Freedland’s posts. As a senior journalist of long residence at The Fraudian, surely he has first say on whether he wants BTL forums open on his posts. Or is he that arrogant that he thinks the vast majority of commenters will agree with him?

Eric Blair
Reader

The US is a peaceful nation and only reluctantly goes to war in order to protect and promote human rights and democracy, and the Guardian welcomes diverse and dissenting opinions and only moderates comments that clearly violate its free-expression oriented “community standards”.

Of course this is complete and utter nonsense and cannot be taken seriously. Taking their justifications at face value is to engage with these entities on their terms and assumes good faith on their part that simply does not exist. You need a different angle. The faux outrage at the Guardian’s absolutely shocking and unexpected duplicity and dishonesty is a bit much.

Harry Stotle
Reader
Harry Stotle

“The faux outrage at the Guardian’s absolutely shocking and unexpected duplicity and dishonesty is a bit much.” – I half agree.

You are correct when you imply (on one level at least) that outrage is rather self indulgent and almost certainly wasted on the Guardian’s output, post Viner.

But across Britain’s polluted media landscape the Guardian at one time offered at least the possibility of balance, even if at heart it was always an organ of the establishment, and the balance it offered was only ever relative to the kind of hysterical fear mongering pumped out by the red tops.

BTL there is still a fair proportion of commentators who still don’t get it, but there are others who seek to correct media bias, aided and abetted of course by information gleaned from alternative sources (or fake news in Guardian speak) and rather than engage with these alternative points of view the Guardian either censors or dismisses them (9/11 being a perfect exemplar).

As I see it we are not so much fighting the Guardian but the forces behind it, sinister forces that seek to control information flows and thereby public discourse – as such we do not have the luxury of standing by while they manipulate the public mood (appealing to conformity, or passivity) so that they can protect a status quo which favours them while harming the majority.

BTL has become a battleground for these dynamics and while it is a forum beset by censorship problems the Guardian can do little to mask the self evident disaffection at least until they are prepared to sanction perhaps 30% of the readership.

Mulga Mumblebrain
Reader
Mulga Mumblebrain

When the Fraudian cancer speaks of ‘community’ standards, the community it is referring to is the Zionist elites and their Blairite Sabbat Goy stooges, and their business colleagues and friends in the Tory Party. It is far past time that a BDS type boycott be organised against this moral evil, and those who choose to advertise in it.

Willem
Reader
Willem

It was taken down because the comments were “extremely offensive or threatening”

Of course the comments weren’t extremely offensive or threatening.
But according to the conventional wisdom of the Guardian censor, they were offensive and threathening. Because anything that goes against the line that the Guardian is always good and right, is offensive and threathening.

One could better call that conventional foolishness…

Please note that the PR in the Guardian (and other MSM) is not meant to convince the reader about some ‘truth’, but is merely meant as a line of reasoning that TPTB need to tell their stories as if they are true (and therefore cannot be considered as misleading or as lies). And if that line of reasoning gets repeated over and over again, readers and viewers may still not believe that what is written or told is true, but will be numbed down nevertheless and therefore accept it as truth.

Like they accept the truth of some washing powder, breakfast cereal, automobile, song, science, and state religion that needs to be bought for one’s own good.

That is the strategy.

And the conventional wisdom is, that that strategy works.

The sad part is, it does work. But not always, as in the Skripal case, HRC’s election, Brexit (I think), Greece’s Oxi, the protests agains the war in Iraq, etc. But then there is fortunately always a distraction (the more silly, the better) to save the day (and the story).

Is all I learned from reading the MSM.

Mulga Mumblebrain
Reader
Mulga Mumblebrain

The Masada Complex that is afflicting the Zionist racist, terrorist, apartheid state, with its OPEN declaration of its racist nature, and its entrenchment in law, and that has spread worldwide in the fanatically vicious campaign to destroy BDS and ALL support for the Palestinians, has spread to that Zionist sewer cum cancer, the Fraudian. The sheer, psychopathic, relentlessness of the screeching hate-mongering by vicious Zionists and their despicable Blairite scum lackeys, is quite unhinged. Long ago demented, but, as these creatures are prone to do, just growing and growing and growing. Driven by HATRED, hatred of those who ‘..get in our way’, as Jabotinsky, the Jewish fascist, stated would be the excuse for the murders and massacres that littered the Zionist conquest of Palestine. Jabotinsky’s legacy is very much alive on the Israeli Right, in Netan-yahoo itself, and, plainly, throughout the stinking carcinogenic cadaver of the Fraudian.

Dungroanin
Reader
Dungroanin

I was banned because i had been previously banned according to a MadManager!

I was told my comments were ‘off topic’ but there was no explanation of how?

I was told there was no automatic filter that highlighted my comment; and no one reported it. Apparently a random moderator happened to see it and deleted it and others, i have no idea which? On which stories? When? By whom? And why? But I am permanently barred!

In the meantime – it appears Martin Chulov has abandoned Beirut and Turkey, or whereever he was, with the inside reports on the Syria Campaign, and is now a bestie of OBL’s mum! The utterly useless and unverified reports by him need checking and his ‘journalist’ credentials torn up. He completely missed the secret negotiations between Syria/US/UN/Russia.. right under his nose.

The Guardian is funded by oligarch funds and state operators. It is staffed by the same. And by their militaristic behaviour, the Mods and Managers have given themselves away. They are mindless walking dead. Only capable of following orders.

We are well rid. The above shows they are failing and actually generating some pretty pissed off punters (ex myself after 40 years of daily purchase) – who are capable of raining shit on their every bs move across multiple platforms – when we were quite happy to just roam btl, easily ignored. They are creating hydras.

Mulga Mumblebrain
Reader
Mulga Mumblebrain

Chulov is MOSSAD-too many people have seen through the ‘al-Qaeda did it’, 9/11 crap, and perhaps heard of the ‘ five celebrating Israelis’ filming the atrocity as it occurred, from Liberty Park in New Jersey. Time for a practised propaganda liar, and with Israel and the Sordid Barbarians being such best friends and ‘cousins’ who better than Chulov?

MichaelK
Reader
MichaelK

The Guardian has become something almost indistinguishable from self-parody. It’s bizarre how awful and detached from the real world it’s become.

Harry Stotle
Reader
Harry Stotle

The quality of churnalism is so dire these days that BTL it’s generally like watching an adult taking sweets off a child.

Don’t Guardian staffers ever get tired of being placed over the knee of reality and spanked on the arse, I mean are they so dim that they fail to understand how their idiotic propaganda is being fact checked and then dismantled even as it is being constructed?

I know it shouldn’t, but a few things still rankle about their modus operandi.

First of all virtue signalling in the shape of ‘won’t somebody think of the children’ type articles, for example lamenting the carnage in Syria while busily backing the neocons and Sunni Jihadis, or promoting anti-Corbynism at home knowing full well the alternative is a further dose of May, JRM and de Pfeffel.

Another is the endless stream of scare-mongering about ‘fake news’ which coming from one of the main purveyors only adds further layers of irony.

And then of course we have the growing culture of intolerance manifested in brittle censorship should anyone dare challenge the editorial line on anything ranging from Corbyn’s alleged anti-semitism, even though it is an all too obvious device confected by right wing elements in the media, or use of Russian ‘bots’ to undermine the very fabric of US democracy – bizarrely there seems to be no trace of self-awareness when they are pushing this shit.

The same thing is going on in the USA described by Jimmy Dore as ‘the death rattle of journalism unnoticed by journalists’ – no wonder the powers that be are now turning their attention to the flow of information across the alternative media.

George Cornell
Reader
George Cornell

I enjoyed their manic and obsessive support of Hillary Clinton while soft soaping the scheming machinations of the Democratic National Committee. All the while demonstrating they don’t really believe in the democratic process, if it does not suit their candidate. The six anti-Trump articles/day were unsuccessful in shoehorning Hillary in which is what happens when you expose your contempt for basic democratic principles. So having subverted democracy, there should be no surprise that the Fraudians are up to their eyeballs in Goebbels-style propaganda and censorship. Their self-assessment skills are nil.

Mulga Mumblebrain
Reader
Mulga Mumblebrain

The Fraudian is almost completely staffed by Zionist Jews and Zionist Sabbat Goy lackeys, at least in those published. There is the root of the disaster, of the cancer of lies and hate-mongering it has become. Even a few non-Zionist Jews, and such make up an ever-increasing proportion of that community, would provide some balance, but the Jewish elites, the only ones who count, are ferociously Zionist, Islamophobic, hating of Arabs, genocidal towards the eternally brutalised Palestinians, and riven with rage at any goy who dares to support the Palestinians and threaten their evil, apartheid, project, Eretz Yisrael. The Fraudian is now EXACTLY akin to any Murdoch publication, say the ‘Australian, in this benighted morontopia, with many of the precise same biases, sordid techniques of hate and fear-mongering and disinforming and psychopathic self-righteousness, a feature of the very worst types of Zionists.

Denis O'hAichir
Reader
Denis O'hAichir

The Guardian and its readers are muggwumpers.