Skip to content or view screen version

Indymedia Removes Comments Function

IMC UnKollected | 01.04.2012 09:00 | Indymedia

Indymedia UK has decided to remove the comments function available on the UK Indymedia website. Although the ability to comment on articles was originally felt to be vital in fostering inclusion, a sense of empowerment and to facilitate intelligent debate amongst activists unable to talk face to face, the comments pages are now felt by the collective and many users to be obsolete, if not downright destructive.

It is undeniable that over the past couple of years, Indymedia moderation has on occasion allowed itself to be subjective, partisan and to assist with the agenda of cliques and commentators in suppressing information, mediating discussion through its ability to hide comments and in allowing non-pacifist struggle abroad and in the UK to be consistently denigrated. Moderators have repeatedly removed comments which express solidarity with insurrectionary and revolutionary ideas, whilst leaving comments up which attack those ideas and the attacks which result from this tendency.

As anarchists, it is important that we reflect continually on our own projects and that we are flexible enough to change them or dissolve them when we feel they are no longer useful or are felt to have become damaging to social struggle. It is obvious to us that sincere revolutionaries in this country have by and large ceased to make use of the comments pages precisely because they are so routinely censored by being hidden on the pretext of an ‘editorial guideline’. It is equally obvious that this function is now being used almost singularly by the security services, fascists, and reactionary liberals to sow discontent and to demoralise people. Indymedia has become the vector of a psychological operation waged by the state. The moderation is now apparently so fully infiltrated and it’s larger function so subverted, we have taken the strategic decision to remove the ability to make comments on articles, communiqués and news items. We will also be reviewing the editorial guidelines, for example the guideline against questioning IMC decisions. No one should be above questioning, not least us. We accept at this juncture that as a collective, we have to be more accountable and our interventions more transparent.

Our decision to alter the nature of the website is also because, while we agree to use technology to spread news of struggle against the current social order, our evolution both as individuals, anarchists and as a species requires that we learn discretion and the intelligence to know when to stop. The contemporary fetish for social networking sites merely encourages the kind of faceless, mediated, rude and dangerous interactions and bullying that we have seen emerging through the comments pages on Indymedia. We have seen the havoc that indiscriminate and cynical use of technology can wreak, in our personal lives and in the larger society. We have no way of knowing who is using our site and who is commenting and this is why it is such a spectacular weapon in the hands of the state. We are against civilisation and without removing the tool of Indymedia completely, we will not allow our alternative media to continue to be used by those who want to destroy us.

Please feel free to use Indymedia to disseminate news and particularly your action reports.

The Comments Function will be disabled some time later on April 1st.

IMC UnKollected
- e-mail: ghostofmk@kilbrin.net
- Homepage: www.gladio.org

Additions

LOL, check the date...

01.04.2012 09:39

Dispite this being a joke there is a serious point here — all sorts of pro-establishment, pro-war disinformation trolling takes place here and the admins of the site struggle to keep up with removing all the comments which clearly are designed specifically to demoralise, dissuade and divide activists.

This is not a new problem, back in 2005 we changed the way comments work because of this, "Some comments seem to be designed to discourage, disinform and undermine activists." And Sheffield Indymedia added an additional Pro-Establishment Disinformation editorial guideline to address this, "Articles or comments which are designed to undermine criticism and critiques of the ruling class agenda" may be hidden.

If there are comments posted to an article which need removing please email the UK Indymedia collective. Using either the private Contact List or the public Moderation List (this has public archives and anyone can join it) — using the comments to post requests for or complaints about moderation isn't the right way to do it, please use the lists.

1 admin

Comments

Hide 6 hidden comments or hide all comments

Lame attempt at April fools joke

01.04.2012 09:03

3/10

The joker

Happy April 1st!

01.04.2012 09:10

Nuff sed!

Town End Boy

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Further improvement

01.04.2012 09:36

You could further improve the site by stopping the daily stream of anti Semitic crap that dominates the news wire and by banning that racist arsehole FTP from having anything to do with us here

Jok

hahaha

01.04.2012 10:34

i almost wouldn't mind comments being disabled since there are so many terrible ones.

got me!

sadly

01.04.2012 15:29

'No one should be above questioning, not least us. We accept at this juncture that as a collective, we have to be more accountable and our interventions more transparent. '

Sadly, this is only something Indymedia UK can say on April 1.

noted

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

and an example

01.04.2012 15:32

Here's a good example of how threads get gutted if they go poorly for an Indymedia editor

 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2012/03/494251.html?c=all

noted

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Example?

01.04.2012 16:15

Why choose that article?
What that looks to me like is a bigotted pro Zionist ranting like a small child using the usual troll techniques. Seems reasonable to hide that distasteful, you're all anti-semite holo deniers BS
that appears to come from a single source. Could 'noted' be that source I mean why that thread.?
Chosen at random ?

eh?

Jokes for Jokers.

01.04.2012 16:17

On the whole it wouldn't be such a bad idea to kill off the comments section of this site because it is clearly being used as a vehicle for the state and those who happen to be the states loyalists.

But its also a good opportunity to garner opinion on any given subject and that must mean that all comments are allowed even from those who have nothing credible to say on a given topic or who are clearly up to no good. If you're ideas and knowledge of a subject are good and you have a rounded wholesome sense of what is good and bad in this world, its a no brainer which ideas and opinions are good and which are clearly drivel.

As somebody on this site said in the comments section previously, Indymedia's output is not judged by the comments which follow an article. You do not determine the validity of a subject based on the rantings of anonymous users who have supposedly clinical expertise on a subject, but who still do not have the confidence to post under their own names. The simple fact of it is that the comments sections are little more than a chance to post a reaction to an article, whether that reaction stands up on legs of its own is down to who agrees...and the validity of the idea in question.

As far as trolls are concerned, well, this place looks like a killing jar for them on some days. I've seen trolls not just go down in flames, but diced and quartered and left for dead by some of our more dilligent users!

What it is not ever safe to do, is to assume that the commentators are representative of the general readership. Its a well known fact that modern online communications are terribly abused by those who have no honesty or decency but only want the world in their own image. Both the 'left' and the 'right' are the nub of that particular problem. They care little for genuine representation, choosing instead to build the world using their own stones, to design that fits their own planning with tools that can only be handled by their own apprentices.

This is the very essense of heirarchy and inequity. This failing world, is the world they built. There is as much dishonesty and hypocracy in the 'left-winger' as there is in the 'right-winger', and that, is the broad basis of the problem we have in the comments sections.

IMCUK

noted said:

01.04.2012 16:46

"Sadly, this is only something Indymedia UK can say on April 1."

Yet there has always been a way of raising issues about moderation with the collective, and it is clearly outlined in the editorial guidelines:

"Concerns about editorial guidelines or queries about moderation are dealt with on the imc-uk-moderation list. These issues are not dealt with through the newswire, and newswire posts on these topics will be hidden."
 http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/static/editorial.html

The choice not to use this is with the user.

Bearing in mind that there is no doubt that the comments section is abused by cops and others with intentions that fall outside of the sites ethos, there is no reason to fill the site with the nonsense of the trolls who clearly are setting out to undermine the site.

So, if you've got a complaint, the list is there. If you can't be bothered to use it, then you have no right to expect accountability.

another admin

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

loser

01.04.2012 23:36

>>As far as trolls are concerned, well, this place looks like a killing jar for them on some days. I've seen trolls not just go down in flames, but diced and quartered and left for dead by some of our more dilligent users!

Utter Bullshit! Anyway, trolling is a form of non-violent, peaceful protest - so tough!
Its legal and there is nothing you can do about it so fuck off and go back to the sandpit to play with your willy.

anon

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

framing dispute

02.04.2012 01:46

Having perused the hidden comments and the thread linked to there ... this seems like one of those classic cases where framing determines everything.

In one frame, Indymedia UK is trying to defend itself against those who won't cross the proper i's and dot the proper t's when protesting distinctly racist posts. And I can appreciate Indymedia UK's wanting to be an absolute show-no-quarter stickler to protocols (an unfortunate word in this context) in this regard.

In a broader frame, in terms of Palestinian rights and the fight against racism, though, there is plenty of room to be dismayed at the idea that an Indymedia editor is also a contributor to a homophobic/anti-Semitic site, and that he is taking it upon himself personally to defend the (remaining shreds of) honor of someone literally hundreds of the biggest names in the Palestinian solidarity movement in the UK and US have publicly gone on record as regarding as an anti-Semite and Holocaust denier.

The argument that these hundreds are all 'crypto-zio thought police' hardly holds water - what benefit would it give the Palestinian solidarity movement to defame someone on their own side as a Holocaust denier, if that isn't what he is? This is a question the Atzmon-ites are only able to answer in comicly broad-brush terms of 'zionist subjugation' and so forth, as if choosing not to hang out with anti-Semites is a sign of secret zionism.

Indymedia has always chosen to frame this dispute as 'who is anyone else to tell me who I should associate with' - which is a valid argument, as far as it goes. But if your faith is truly in the Palestinian solidarity movement, and its decision to publicly rid itself of an unfortunate anti-Semitic subculture within it - the Atzmons and Eisens and Clark-Lowes - then why not listen to them, listen to what they're saying, rather than just going into a knee-jerk denunciation of 'well they're all Stalinist McCarthyists trying to stamp out free thought'?

That is, ask yourself, what are they getting right that you're getting wrong? And are you really going to use up your energy insisting to your last breath that you have the right to associate with anti-Semites and Holocaust deniers if you want to, and no movement - not even the Palestinian solidarity movement - is going to prize that right from your hands?

Because if that is the way Indymedia UK wants to approach it - fighting for the right to let one of its editors do the goosestep with his buddies - then the Palestinian solidarity movement will continue to route around it the way it increasingly is already.

hammer n. nails

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Inaccuracies

02.04.2012 09:37

"In one frame, Indymedia UK is trying to defend itself against those who won't cross the proper i's and dot the proper t's when protesting distinctly racist posts. And I can appreciate Indymedia UK's wanting to be an absolute show-no-quarter stickler to protocols (an unfortunate word in this context) in this regard."

Without evidence of any 'distinctly racist posts' the poster misrepresents the reasons for a consensually agreed guideline. The reason for the guideline is so that the newswire is not filled with complaints about moderation, and the list is read by all admins so it makes more sense to post them there. If the point of posting on the wire is to rile up other users rather than sort out the problematic post, then trolling seems an appropriate description of the activity.

"In a broader frame, in terms of Palestinian rights and the fight against racism, though, there is plenty of room to be dismayed at the idea that an Indymedia editor is also a contributor to a homophobic/anti-Semitic site, and that he is taking it upon himself personally to defend the (remaining shreds of) honor of someone literally hundreds of the biggest names in the Palestinian solidarity movement in the UK and US have publicly gone on record as regarding as an anti-Semite and Holocaust denier."

Is it the assumption of the poster that members of the collective are to act not out of political conviction, but in ways that will please the trolls (an impossible task) and those who have differing viewpoints. Is the Indymedia moderator posting racist and homophobic views? If so then there are surely grounds for taking this up with the collective. There remains a dispute within Palestine solidarity circles about Atzmon and if someone doesn't believe that he is either anti-semitic nor a holocaust denier, then where do they give up their right to express that view?

No platforming is a tactic intended to ensure that fascists are unable to express fascists viewpoints, and when it is used against those who are not fascists nor nazis, then it is questionable. The fact remains that Ali Abunimah has failed to read Atzmon's book and rather than refute Atzmon's writings and thoughts has instead called for disavowal in a manner that is not not acceptable to a number of pro-Palestinian activists.

"The argument that these hundreds are all 'crypto-zio thought police' hardly holds water - what benefit would it give the Palestinian solidarity movement to defame someone on their own side as a Holocaust denier, if that isn't what he is? This is a question the Atzmon-ites are only able to answer in comicly broad-brush terms of 'zionist subjugation' and so forth, as if choosing not to hang out with anti-Semites is a sign of secret zionism."

Unless proof is provided of the holocaust denial and anti-semitism of Atzmon, then it is a baseless charge. The comments you are referring to took place in the context of an article by David Rovics refuting the claims that Atzmon is anti-semitic. It was his response to being asked to join the lynch mob. Each letter is the thoughts of one signatory and their interpretation of atzmon - it makes no real sense that others simply append their signature to it, rather than producing their own texts. Neither is the claim that all those who oppose him are 'crypto-zionist thought police' true, its simply another misrepresentation.

"Indymedia has always chosen to frame this dispute as 'who is anyone else to tell me who I should associate with' - which is a valid argument, as far as it goes. But if your faith is truly in the Palestinian solidarity movement, and its decision to publicly rid itself of an unfortunate anti-Semitic subculture within it - the Atzmons and Eisens and Clark-Lowes - then why not listen to them, listen to what they're saying, rather than just going into a knee-jerk denunciation of 'well they're all Stalinist McCarthyists trying to stamp out free thought'?"

Indymedia has done no such thing. And if you've read the ftp articles on deLiberation, then you will see that there isn't faith in the PSC and its decision. There is not a consensus amongst Palestinians or pro-Palestinian activists on this matter - but by choosing to attempt to shut down meetings and expel activists because they have their own thoughts, the PSC and cohorts are indeed straying into Stalinist Mycathyite territory. Its fine to oppose someone else's viewpoint but when you get to the point of attempting to censor it you are moving into authoritarianism.

"That is, ask yourself, what are they getting right that you're getting wrong? And are you really going to use up your energy insisting to your last breath that you have the right to associate with anti-Semites and Holocaust deniers if you want to, and no movement - not even the Palestinian solidarity movement - is going to prize that right from your hands?"

And next you'll be proposing a contract of behaviour for IMCistas. Freedom of association is not yet a crime .

"Because if that is the way Indymedia UK wants to approach it - fighting for the right to let one of its editors do the goosestep with his buddies - then the Palestinian solidarity movement will continue to route around it the way it increasingly is already."

The only folks getting close to goosestepping in all this are those who want to replace debate with authoritarian measures. So yet another gross misrepresentation.

At the end of the day, the comment is not relevant to the thread and is yet another anonymous poster (or indeed the same one) misrepresenting the scenario.

IMCista

Hide 6 hidden comments or hide all comments