23

What “community standards” did these comments breach? #21

The following comments – sent in to us by a reader – were censored by The Guardian. Which of the well-publicised CiF “community standards” did they breach?

Removed comments, posted under the Gaby Hinsliff opinion piece Cambridge is right: you can’t take pride in the past and ignore the horror of slavery on Tuesday 30th of April:

…aaannnddd the gaps where they used to be:

So: Which of the Guardian’s “community standards” did these comments break?

  • 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 or threatening?”?
  • Are they “flame-wars based on ingrained partisanship or generalisations”?
  • Are they not “relevant”?

If none of the above – why were they 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
james bate
james bate

Maybe because its wrong by power of ten ? Happy to be corrected .

ragheadthefiendlyterrorist

I would not mind the Brutish being compelled to pay reparations for the looting done by their empire of evil in the Indian subcontinent for 200 years. If it means the destitution of all Brutish citizens today, irrespective of their direct ancestors’ guilt, that’s all right with me. I am absolutely serious about this.

Stonky
Stonky

Go back 30 generations (less than a millennium) and everyone alive on the planet has more than a billion names in their ancestry. Given the prevalence of slavery through all human society over thousands of years of human history, it is literally impossible that there is anyone alive today who does not have both slavers and slaves in their ancestral pool.

With this in mind, I have just awarded myself one million pounds, to be paid by me, in compensation to my enslaved ancestors on behalf on those of my ancestors who enslaved them. I heartily recommend this approach to all axe-grinding slavery grievance johnnies. Whooee! It’s amazing how good it feels to have just agreed to pay yourself a million pounds!

But as far as I am concerned I have now paid my share. No axe-grinding slavery grievance johnnies who want more money need bother me further. Jog on fellas. I’m done.

Doggrotter
Doggrotter

I’m shocked, shocked, that they still allow comments. I thought the gurnard was a not much liked fish (very tasty) No it’s a crappy newspaper

barovsky

Yeah but the chattering classes like it, makes em feel all gooey inside.

Martin Usher
Martin Usher

This entire censored Guardian thread, while a bit tongue in cheek, is actually making a very valid point — given the history of the world and the systematic injustices perpetrated throughout history who makes the check to whom and who’s bank account is it drawn on? Things get a bit murkier when you actually start to look at history; for example, the English ruling classes (for want of a better term) were distinctly equal opportunity when it came to plunder and exploitation. They got into colonial expansion because they ran out of peasants to exploit at home. The spoils were not distributed equally, either — sure, there’s a college or two, a statue maybe, but the lives of ordinary people in even the same town were not materially improved by colonial spoils. (But it would be their descendants who would get to pay — that’s really the true story of civilization.)

To get some perspective I’d suggest watching youTube videos of TV shows like “Servants, The True Story of Life Below Stairs” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqiMASk5MIU).

Nixon Scraypes
Nixon Scraypes

I like the equal opportunity line. The British ruling class seems to be descended from the Normans . Their invasion was a massive operation which must have put them in huge debt which would go a long way to explain their subsequent bad behaviour! I think the financial side of wars and invasions is under reported in history. When the Normans failed to cross London bridge they forded the Thames upstream and were then allowed into the city. They made a deal to respect the rights and privileges of the city or was it the City ,which is still separate from Britain. Is it possible that the City of London was already the financial centre it remains? Did it finance the invasion and that of the Norsemen just previous which seems to me far from coincidental?

Frankly Speaking
Frankly Speaking

How fitting, found this headline in the Guardian from 2015:

“Orwell’s nightmare vision of 1984 is always right here, right now”

https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2015/oct/23/orwells-nightmare-vision-of-1984-is-always-right-here-right-now

John2o2o
John2o2o

The Guardian seeks to control and direct public discourse along certain approved routes: you all know them, leftist/liberal establishment ideas and tropes, anything that steps outside of that is ruthlessly put down.

The discussion above was threatening to them, punching holes in their narrow ideological frameworks with clever philosophical ideas dressed in simple language. They can’t have that.

labrebisgalloise

“All the officer patients in the ward were forced to censor letters written by all the enlisted-men patients, who were kept in residence in wards of their own. It was a monotonous job, and Yossarian was disappointed to learn that the lives of enlisted men were only slightly more interesting than the lives of officers. After the first day he had no curiosity at all. To break the monotony he invented games. Death to all modifiers, he declared one day, and out of every letter that passed through his hands went every adverb and every adjective. The next day he made war on articles. He reached a much higher plane of creativity the following day when he blacked out everything in the letters but a, an and the. That erected more dynamic intralinear tensions, he felt, and in just about every case left a message far more universal. Soon he was proscribing parts of salutations and signatures and leaving the text untouched. One time he blacked out all but salutation “Dear Mary” from a letter, and at the bottom he wrote, “I yearn for you tragically, A.T. Tappman, Chaplain, U.S. Army.” A.T. Tappman was the group chaplain’s name.

When he had exhausted all possibilities in the letters, he began attacking the names and addresses on the envelopes, obliterating whole homes and streets, annihilating entire metropolises with careless flicks of his wrist as though he were God. Catch-22 required that each censored letter bear the censoring officer’s name. Most letters he didn’t read at all. On those he didn’t read at all he wrote his own name. On those he did read he wrote, “Washington Irving.” When that grew monotonous he wrote, “Irving Washington.” Censoring the envelopes had serious repercussions, and produced a ripple of anxiety on some ethereal military echelon that floated a C.I.D. man back into the ward posing as a patient. They all knew he was a C.I.D. man because he kept inquiring about an officer named Irving or Washington and because after his first day there he wouldn’t censor letters. He found them too monotonous.”

Joseph Heller, Catch 22

Gwyn
Gwyn

As something of an annoying wind-up merchant myself, I can only admire the Guardian’s work. Their line about ”fearless journalism” is an outstandingly good piss-take.

The worrying thing is that so many people take it at face value.

Archie1954
Archie1954

Don’t trust any mainstream media. They are not in the business of disseminating the truth. They are simply government propaganda outlets.

barovsky

Actually, big media is in the business of making money thus maintaining the system that enables them to make money is their primary objective.

hauptmanngurski

And then there’s the idea of journalists and editors that scribes which motivate people to do something needs to be avoided, like taking to the streets. As a former journalist myself, in Germany, I can tell you that we were taught to have a responsibility that peace in the streets remains. The German press is 100% self-censored. ‘Don’t feed the demagogues like Hitler and Goebbels’ we were told and that was the end of the discussion.

Just had a comment from yesterday censored by the Guardian – can’t even remember what it was exactly. I take care in not being aggressive etc. but they still object to something. There was an occasion that a comment was restored, too. The spell checker and autocomplete function comes from the cloud where everything is monitored and stored.

The Guardian cannot be ignored because it reaches many people.Just keep ploughing along, a slim percentage being zapped is just a fact of life.

Mishko
Mishko

About them objecting to something: there is always something, and too much (self-censoring)
is never enough. Now STFU and keep wrestling with your (inner) demons!

Haltonbrat
Haltonbrat

The Manchester Guardian with CP Scott as editor was a propagada outlet for the Zionists.

Rhisiart Gwilym
Rhisiart Gwilym

Speaking of community standards, Off-G editorial folk, what is this site doing still advertising Patreon. Haven’t you heard that they have started trying to censor the output of some of their signed up creators? I had to switch from Patreon to SubscribeStar, after Patreon started giving Dmitry Orlov aggro with his account. As far as I know, SubscribeStar has managed to keep its nose clean – so far! – from the creeping censorship rot that’s spreading through the bigbiz ‘service providers’ of Silly Fart Valley – at the behest of the gics (gangsters-in-charge) running the Anglozionist imperial deep state, naturally. And then there’s Paypal; Omidyar’s racket. I should let THEM process any donations I might want to give to Off-G? Omidyar, the billionaire stiff behind the deeply-equivocal Intercept (still suppressing the bulk of Snowden’s archive from public view, in case anyone has forgotten). Remember the old saying, Off-Gers: ‘Touch pitch and be defiled.’

Frankly Speaking
Frankly Speaking

You false news peddlers!

I hereby declare that I appreciate the care and attention afforded me by the professional and respected Guardian journalists, opinion writers, editors and moderators to both inform me of events and opinions around the world by carefully researched and curated articles, not reporting fake Russian news, and also from shielding me from the great psychological harm of other readers’ views with which i may not agree with on their forums.

I feel very lucky, even privileged, to live in a society with such high quality media as the Guardian, amongst others such as the BBC. I gladly financially support both of them and would pay double if I could.

ROFL 🤣

Gezzah Potts
Gezzah Potts

Frankly Speaking: ha ha ha heh heh…. Brilliant. My first laugh for the day F.S

barovsky

Well largely they seem to be rubbish but rubbish not on the list of proscribed comments. Clearly the robots at the Guardian have no sense of humour.

Headlice
Headlice
Helmut Taylor
Helmut Taylor

And Who the fuck is Mueller!

Mishko
Mishko

And why does he never ever take a day off, fer F’s sake!