All posts tagged: comment is free

The Establishment loves us and only wants to help

End free speech and save the minorities! (will anyone really fall for this?)

by Blackcatte The current – and frankly bizarre even by recent standards – Guardian campaign “the web we want” seems to be driven by two main agendas. The first, and probably the major one is the long-simmering plan to “regulate” (i.e. control and censor) free speech on the Web. That the Graun’s effort is part of a co-ordinated new offensive in that department is pretty conclusively illustrated by the fact the ex minister for “equality”, Maria Miller delivered her own diatribe agains the “problem” of internet “abuse” just days after the Guardian’s new campaign took off. The similarity between her invective and that employed by the Guardian’s tame journos puts it beyond question that this is an Establishment-wide move. A concerted plan to use exaggerated claims of “abuse” and its alleged impact on minorities, to mobilise well-meaning liberals in support of internet censorship. In fact, unlike the feeble Apologists at Graun HQ, Miller at least has the guts to pretty much say so out loud: “We need better laws and we need better enforcement. Government …

Cover image for Decrying Democracy

Decrying Democracy, Using Feminism against Corbyn

by Vaska The UK political and media elites are so upset over Jeremy Corbyn’s election as leader of the Labour Party – and the party members’ repudiation of the Blairite years – that they’re now throwing feminism at him, too. And, while they’re at it, they’ve begun bemoaning the pitfalls of democracy, also, as the opening lines of Yvonne Roberts’ piece in the Guardian shows: Whether or not you like the outcome, democracy of sorts has been vigorously massaged back into life in the Labour party. To deliver a depressingly familiar sight: three men at the top while a woman, Harriet Harman, is patronisingly told she didn’t do all that bad a job as a stand-in. So, democracy has been revived, but democracy is a villain now – not for delivering power into the hands of right-wing war-mongers like Cameron and his Tory mates, but for electing a man of the left such as Corbyn. This is identity politics pure and simple, bereft of ideas but big on narcissism. Or, as one of the CIF …

commisopinion

When did the Graun’s “Comment is Free” become “Opinion”?

by BlackCatte Some time over the last few months, while the hated new version was coming out of Beta, a funny thing happened at the Guardian. With almost no announcement or explanation the famous, vaunted “Comment is Free” section changed its name to “Opinion.” It kept the old URL, and even kept Scott’s proud declaration (in smaller type), but the name itself vanished like the erstwhile ethical reputations of it’s journalists – without ceremony or acknowledgment. http://www.theguardian.com/uk/commentisfree Here’s the old site, screencapped last autumn: And here’s the new improved version: What does this IngSoc style rebranding imply? Are they sending a message? Or is it just a pragmatic acceptance that you can’t allow Comment to be Free any longer when you’ve allied with the Kyiv Post and Radio Free Europe and are openly propagandising for neo-nazis, WW2 revisionists and the military industrial complex.

sepp-blatter-fifa-009

What “community standards” did this comment breach? #10

These comment were censored by the Guardian. Which of the well-publicised CiF “community standards” did they breach? Comments removed from: Fifa’s Sepp Blatter says 2018 World Cup in Russia will… Comments removed from: Russia has more right to Crimea than Britain to Falklands… Which of the Guardian’s “community standards” do they breach? 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 were they taken down? see our archive of censored comments

0*etOEGNrj-_foaoKk

How I was censored by The Guardian for writing about Israel’s war for Gaza’s gas

Read full article on Nafeez Ahmed’s website After writing for The Guardian for over a year, my contract was unilaterally terminated because I wrote a piece on Gaza that was beyond the pale. In doing so, The Guardian breached the very editorial freedom the paper was obligated to protect under my contract. I’m speaking out because I believe it is in the public interest to know how a Pulitizer Prize-winning newspaper which styles itself as the world’s leading liberal voice, casually engaged in an act of censorship to shut down coverage of issues that undermined Israel’s publicised rationale for going to war. Gaza’s gas I joined the Guardian as an environment blogger in April 2013. Prior to this, I had been an author, academic and freelance journalist for over a decade, writing for The Independent, Independent on Sunday, Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, The Scotsman, Foreign Policy, The Atlantic, Quartz, Prospect, New Statesman, Le Monde diplomatique, among others. On 9th July 2014, I posted an article via my Earth Insight blog at The Guardian’s environment …

76ec31c0-6644-40f0-aab9-0d2ea13ec128-2060x1236

What “community standards” did this comment breach? #9

This comment was censored by the Guardian. Which of the well-publicised CiF “community standards” did it breach? Comment Removed from: Corrupt, cash-strapped and lacking skill: the Ukraine army Britons come to train Which of the Guardian’s “community standards: does it breach? 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 a “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

2000

What “community standard” did this comment breach? #8

This comment was censored by the Guardian. Which of the well-publicised CiF “community standards” did it breach? Comment Removed from: Is Putin Ill? ‘Everything is fine’ despite cancelled meetings and old photos Which of the Guardian’s “community standards” did it breach? 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 a “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

d3eb541d-5e27-44a5-8997-579da5a8670c-2060x1236

What “community standard” did this comment breach? #6

This comment was censored by the Guardian. Which of the well-publicised CiF “community standards” did it breach? Comment Removed from: Britain Should Arm Ukraine Which of the Guardian’s “community standards” does it breach? 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 a “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

What “community standard” did this comment breach? #5

This comment was censored by the Guardian. Which of the well-publicised CiF “community standards” did it breach? Comment Removed from: Britain Should Arm Ukraine 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 a “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