The Daily Mail covered yesterday's EDO protest: 
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=539229&in_page_id=1811&in_page_id=1811&expand=true#StartComments. In addition to The Times and BBC News.
Now can someone explain to me why IMC-UK is not only content to publish lies and distortion in a front page feature, http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/03/393065.html?c=all
but hid the first comment which points this out, as well as several that made good arguments (because they were not pro-Palestinian).
Is there any fundamental difference, then, between the editorial style of IMC-UK and the Daily Mail?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=539229&in_page_id=1811&in_page_id=1811&expand=true#StartComments. In addition to The Times and BBC News. Now can someone explain to me why IMC-UK is not only content to publish lies and distortion in a front page feature,
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/03/393065.html?c=all but hid the first comment which points this out, as well as several that made good arguments (because they were not pro-Palestinian).
Is there any fundamental difference, then, between the editorial style of IMC-UK and the Daily Mail?