Use of media as propaganda tool no longer news
disappointedexit | 09.10.2008 09:56
I was told by imc author IMCista that highlighting clear sources of mainstream news coverage highlighting discrepancies between two opposing positions taken by MP George Galloway which were designed to give different message to local constituents to that of the political establishment ie hypocrisy was not news. This Imcista said was according to IMC Editorial Guideliens and there is some irony of arbiters on a website dedicated to news saying that highlighting duplicitous media news is not news.
After being accused of being an "arse" and my posts being hidden. Initially I was given no reason for my post being hidden and then told that the post contained "allegations" but when I pointed out that the duplicitous positions of George Galloway MP on local issues were well recorded. The position was changed after 24 by imcista saying hypocrisy in the news and sleazy politicians is no news. can we also hide posts about George Bush etc etc or is it only SWP and George Galloway posts being hidden ... it is with great regret therefore that I have realised a website for news is no longer about analysing or considering the news - it is now a website where you need to conform.
disappointedexit
Additions
Use the list
09.10.2008 10:26
Here is the hidden piece entitled: Exposing the hypocrisy and lies of George Galloway MP - a few examples
"In the stupid local rag,The East End Advertiser, Galloway says of the defrauding banking system that has led to a world economic crisis. Galloway says: “The glittering spires of Canary Wharf and the Square Mile have produced little ‘trickle down’ to the vast majority of people of Tower Hamlets. Now those same institutions are going to plunge millions in this country into severe financial problems as a result of the credit crunch...Brown foolishly handed over control of monetary policy to a bunch of unelected bankers days after New Labour was elected in 1997. He presided over the deregulation which the spivs and sharks have exploited. “Now he must take back control and force interest rates down, as the noted economic expert Graham Turner has urged. Britain must lead the way.”On the BBC's Daily Politics programme Galloway said he thinks Mr Brown will lead the Labour party into the next general election and they will hold on to the Glenrothes seat next month. Problem is that he is all mouth and no ethics and cannot be trusted as far as you can throw him. Galloway and the SWP have a problem though, the sell-out is a well-known fact as you cannot hide much in the East End
Galloway is trying to pander to an electorate that hates him and does not trust him after he sold them out over numerous issues, worse still he sold them out to the biggest loser in town Ken Livingstone."
It seems to me that Galloway is saying that Brown should never have deregulated the financial system in the fiirst place, and that now he is going to have to bring it back under regulation. You then bring in a non sequitur by pointing out that Galloway thinks Brown will lead the Labour Party in the election and the LP will win the Glenrothes by-election.
You haven't actually exposed any hypocrisy whatsoever (except of course that of Brown who is having to undo his own deregulation and is propping up the results of his deregulation with tax payers money)
It isn't news. Nor are these:
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410211.html
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410207.html
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410213.html
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410214.html
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410215.html
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410216.html
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410217.html
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410219.html
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410222.html
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410223.html
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410248.html
Once again, if you think the decision is wrong, the place to dicuss it is the imc-uk-moderation list. The address is: imc-uk-moderation[at]lists.indymedia.org. and the archive is here: http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-moderation/
Now please stop spamming the wire with your absurd claims.
"In the stupid local rag,The East End Advertiser, Galloway says of the defrauding banking system that has led to a world economic crisis. Galloway says: “The glittering spires of Canary Wharf and the Square Mile have produced little ‘trickle down’ to the vast majority of people of Tower Hamlets. Now those same institutions are going to plunge millions in this country into severe financial problems as a result of the credit crunch...Brown foolishly handed over control of monetary policy to a bunch of unelected bankers days after New Labour was elected in 1997. He presided over the deregulation which the spivs and sharks have exploited. “Now he must take back control and force interest rates down, as the noted economic expert Graham Turner has urged. Britain must lead the way.”On the BBC's Daily Politics programme Galloway said he thinks Mr Brown will lead the Labour party into the next general election and they will hold on to the Glenrothes seat next month. Problem is that he is all mouth and no ethics and cannot be trusted as far as you can throw him. Galloway and the SWP have a problem though, the sell-out is a well-known fact as you cannot hide much in the East End
Galloway is trying to pander to an electorate that hates him and does not trust him after he sold them out over numerous issues, worse still he sold them out to the biggest loser in town Ken Livingstone."
It seems to me that Galloway is saying that Brown should never have deregulated the financial system in the fiirst place, and that now he is going to have to bring it back under regulation. You then bring in a non sequitur by pointing out that Galloway thinks Brown will lead the Labour Party in the election and the LP will win the Glenrothes by-election.
You haven't actually exposed any hypocrisy whatsoever (except of course that of Brown who is having to undo his own deregulation and is propping up the results of his deregulation with tax payers money)
It isn't news. Nor are these:
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410211.html http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410207.html http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410213.html http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410214.html http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410215.html http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410216.html http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410217.html http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410219.html http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410222.html http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410223.html http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/10/410248.html Once again, if you think the decision is wrong, the place to dicuss it is the imc-uk-moderation list. The address is: imc-uk-moderation[at]lists.indymedia.org. and the archive is here:
http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-moderation/ Now please stop spamming the wire with your absurd claims.
IMCista
Comments
Hide the following 3 comments
more odd bits of censorship
09.10.2008 10:34
also
How it works
09.10.2008 12:26
The running of the site is in reality done by a very small core group
The editing and hiding of posts is by no more than two or three people on average a day - frequently only one person is doing it
The Editorial Guidelines have been written in a way that makes them easy to interpret as needed.
Now imagine a situation where one of these individuals has a particular interest in a subject, let's take Israel as that often crops up, if that individual wants to have the site have a clear anti-Israeli bias on its front page then it is easy with some hiding of posts and comments to achieve this. Some editing or other posts and comments and voila ! object achieved. Is this wrong ? Yes of course but that's human nature.
Regretfully becoming an Indy UK editor is close to impossible unless you are a friend of one of the existing ones and share their viewpoints so the initial concept of Open Publishing is skewed to become Open Publishing of things we agree with.
There is no real way of changing this under the present systems so as another poster said on another post you made about this, you just have to live with it. Undoubtedly this makes Indy weaker and profligates a narrow viewpoint but as the alternative is for you to go and start your own Indymedia I think you are probably screwed !
Info giver
Reporting Resistance
09.10.2008 13:14
Undoubtedly makes Indy weaker and profligates a narrow viewpoint". Would Info Giver like Indymedia to promote more articles promoting racial nationalism? Israel defines itself in racial nationalist terms. To be impartial about racism is not a neutral position, it is a position that tolerates the intolerable.
Today's Zionist riots in Acre are a symptom of institutionalised Racial Nationalism.
An excellent new report on media control by Robert Fisk in Occupied Palestine:
@nti-Zionist