IMC censors comments it doesn't like
Against Censorship | 28.11.2011 15:41 | Analysis | Indymedia
IMC moderators are systematically censoring comments on published news wire items that they don't like/ disagree with. Unfortunately, this does give a skewed impression of the terms of the debate around certain issues and the false impression of consensus
This shouldn't be news, but unfortunately it is ... IMC engages in systematic censorship of comments that it disagrees with. Even when these comments are factually correct, even when these comments reflect dissenting views, these comments are deleted.
Such conflicting comments should not be deleted. IMC should not be practicing censorship because to do so undermines the entire raison d'etre of Indymedia - a counter to the dominant voice of mainstream media which censors dissent and opposing views.
IMC should allow dissenting views: allow the views of trolls to be published - this enables others to respond, to challenge and to possibly inform the holders of such views.
If IMC censors dissenting views there can be no challenge. Instead, IMC ends up existing in its own little self-confirmatory bubble away from the real world of conflicting opinions. If IMC readers hold opposing views, then let those views be heard/ read and where those views are unethical, unsustainable, unjust, then let those views and arguments that are ethical, sustainable and just be developed and put forward.
Otherwise, IMC becomes no different than the mealy-mouthed corporate media it prides itself on being different from.
This is no more important and relevant than in the thread regarding false propaganda on Iran having nuclear weapons. Who knows how many of the general public might come to IMC as a result of searching for information on this topic, and how many of those might hold opinions similar to those that have been censored, and because IMC is big enough and confident enough in the truth of the counter-claims, it can allow for a debate, and a dialogue, to emerge, showing all sides of opinion on the matter..
Instead, IMC becomes the alternative media's Fox News and censors all that it doesn't want to hear, that doesn't fit its agenda.
I thought we were different than this.
I thought that we were better than this.
I thought that IMC would be a more exemplary format of alternative and just media.
Please don't censor posts you don't like and show me that my faith - and financial support - in Indymedia was misplaced.
Such conflicting comments should not be deleted. IMC should not be practicing censorship because to do so undermines the entire raison d'etre of Indymedia - a counter to the dominant voice of mainstream media which censors dissent and opposing views.
IMC should allow dissenting views: allow the views of trolls to be published - this enables others to respond, to challenge and to possibly inform the holders of such views.
If IMC censors dissenting views there can be no challenge. Instead, IMC ends up existing in its own little self-confirmatory bubble away from the real world of conflicting opinions. If IMC readers hold opposing views, then let those views be heard/ read and where those views are unethical, unsustainable, unjust, then let those views and arguments that are ethical, sustainable and just be developed and put forward.
Otherwise, IMC becomes no different than the mealy-mouthed corporate media it prides itself on being different from.
This is no more important and relevant than in the thread regarding false propaganda on Iran having nuclear weapons. Who knows how many of the general public might come to IMC as a result of searching for information on this topic, and how many of those might hold opinions similar to those that have been censored, and because IMC is big enough and confident enough in the truth of the counter-claims, it can allow for a debate, and a dialogue, to emerge, showing all sides of opinion on the matter..
Instead, IMC becomes the alternative media's Fox News and censors all that it doesn't want to hear, that doesn't fit its agenda.
I thought we were different than this.
I thought that we were better than this.
I thought that IMC would be a more exemplary format of alternative and just media.
Please don't censor posts you don't like and show me that my faith - and financial support - in Indymedia was misplaced.
Against Censorship
Comments
Hide 1 hidden comment or hide all comments
The decline and fall
28.11.2011 15:53
An excellent article by an activist was hidden by Indymedia moderator 'freethepeeps' because he did not like the content (attacks on Jews).
The article is
The excuse ftp used to hide the original post was "disruptive user'. I have checked the Indy archive and I can't see that this poster has ever posted before so he/she can't be disruptive. I then did a quick Google check and found the story to be true so we are faced with age old problem on Indy UK that of clear antisemitism by one particular mod who has a history of hiding posts that he does not like.
FTP will of course hide this post, he will block the email to the Moderation List I have sent to ensure it is not on the public record and he will bully any other Mod that disagrees with his actions.
More than any other person FTP has damaged the Indy UK site and contributed to its decline in readership. They no longer publish the number of unique visitors to the site but as a former mod I can still see them and the decline is shocking. Between 2007 during the sickening Atzmon debacle and now the number of average daily unique visitors fell from 3476 to 943 and the 'click through' (meaning they read more than one story) fell from 5 to 2. This decline is continuing and during the last meeting of my regional collective we predicted that the UK site here will effectively cease to exist (unique visitors below 5 a day) by the Winter of 2012.
Mark - former UK Indy mod
trolls don't want to be informed
28.11.2011 16:11
That's an admirable sentiment, but trolls aren't there to be informed, they are there to disrupt.
Indymedia allows for different views up to a point, but it never claims to be a completely open news service - it is here to provide an non-hierarchical alternative voice to the mainstream, not to encompass all possible views.
It you allowed absolutely anything to be published, Indymedia would be even more full of cops, trolls, fascists, conspiracy theorists, and spammers than it already is now.
I'm sure moderators overstep the mark sometimes and hide things they shouldn't, but by and large they get it right.
Also remember Indymedia isn't really a discussion forum (though we tend to use it as such). It's a newswire, and comments are really for adding any factual content to the story.
anon
Go waste time on urban75 or libcom instead
28.11.2011 16:35
Indymedia uk has never claimed to be an impartial site. In fact quite the opposite:
"Inherent in the mainstream corporate media is a strong bias towards Capitalism's power structures, and it is an important tool in propagating these structures around the globe. While the mainstream media conceal their manifold biases and alignments, we clearly state our position. Indymedia UK does not attempt to take an objective and impartial standpoint: Indymedia UK clearly states its subjectivity."
"because IMC is big enough and confident enough in the truth of the counter-claims, it can allow for a debate, and a dialogue, to emerge, showing all sides of opinion on the matter.."
But it isn't showing all sides of the argument. The trolls seek to dominate the comments threads and to make posting on Indymedia an unpleasant and unrewarding experience.
If you want a debate with all sides, then find a forum it works better than anonymous comments on an open publishing site.
On the other hand if you think that the site needs news that can inform people who are trying to find something different, then write it.
fuckthetrolls
Hide 1 hidden comment or hide all comments