|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Miscellaneous |
|
Waiting for the Right Wing to have a forum like this! |
Current rating: 0 |
by fool, damn
(No verified email address) |
08 Oct 2001
Modified: 10:46:58 AM |
|
Bastions of the "right" wing, such as "The New American" continually do not give their readers/watchers any place for a forum to discuss, much less publish their OWN news on their sites. Now, why is that?? |
Methinks that the ideological vanguard of the "right" wing doesn't have the balls to actually take on challengers like the "left" apparently does. For all their "Constitutionalist" fervor, they really do a disservice to readers who trust publications like "The New American", with all of its gloss and small business ads.
I'm a "watcher" of magazines like "The New American." Because a lot of people, in rural areas (a traditional "stronghold" for the "right") as well as the most "conservative" cities seem to blindly trust what they read there, and I think I can make a difference here and there when I talk to those people.
Even though the emotionally potent oversimplifications in magazines like "The New American" (and their websites) are always only *given* to readers, and there's really no questioning allowed, there is, of course, always a *germ of truth* within the broader-reaching manipulations. Propagandists everywhere understand that basic method, including "leftist" (and mainstream/"moderate") propagandists.
Now, frankly, over the years, I have found some *germs of truth* that sound pretty interesting, such as the orientation against the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and such world *conspiracies* of elites. Apparently the "right" wing was even taking that topic on BEFORE the "left"! Egad! (for this guy who was pretty much surrounded by "left" propaganda since first coming into a heightening awareness, it hasn't been easy to even see that the "nice" lefties play bullshit not dis-similar to the mainstream)
Yet, there is no room, NEVER any room for a serious discourse in any formal space within the "right"! So when along comes the IMCs of the world, founded on "leftist" concepts (and hype), even "left"-hating "right"-wingers start coming around regularly. Pretty excellent move of the "lefties", huh?
I think the "left" has the "right" beaten this time, hands down. Or am I missing something?
Now, the only question is for the "left": will alleged needs to "edit" "spammers" (allegedly undertaken by this site, as well as allegedly including Cleveland and Chicago...?...) turn into censorship of all dissent? So far, the IMCs' record seems pretty amazingly FREE of "editing" (or censorship), and I applaud you. And I cannot believe that IMCs really are still holding onto their seriously independent orientation!
Excellent!
(btw, I've asked the alleged censored person to email me about his/her version of being blocked by this site, and will get back to y'all if the person seems to have any case at all. It's not a threat, just an issue of fairness, and i figure at least some of you running this site can understand that!) |
|
"Bobby" Won't Answer |
by ML
(No verified email address) |
Current rating: 0
08 Oct 2001
|
Please be assured that we tried for months to engage "Bobby" in a rational coversation. Assuming he is who he seems to be, and not some figment of disinformation operatives, there seems to be no way to do so. How exactly did you attempt to contact him? He claimed that he couldn't use e-mail, because it would be "blocked." Yeah, right. So where did you get his e-mail address or are you just spoofing?
As for the right having a forum like this, I'm sure there are plenty of folks on the right with the know-how and resources to set-up their own Capitalist Media Centers. But why bother? They already have everything from Fox News to CNN, from the News-Gazette to most of the New York Times, from the New American to Newsweek. There is even a certain amount of tolerance for such views on IMC, but that does have it's limits when it comes to spamming and other such behavior. |
|
censorship is an easy word to abuse |
by Paul R.
paul (nospam) mediageek.org (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
08 Oct 2001
|
Anyone who has been in on the conversations at the IMC Steering Group meetings or our e-mail list will know that the issue of hiding some posts has not been taken lightly.
In the case of posts that are hidden, one has to ask, are they really expressions of dissent? Or are they simply "trolls" looking for a fight? Are they folks looking to "prove" that the IMC is really not so independent and open?
There is a difference there, and it is important and relevant. Nobody has shied away from an actual debate or exchange of ideas here. But, please, tell me what exchange of ideas or debate has been suggested or primed by "Bobby Deaf Messenger?"
No, his rants consitute no more an invitation to debate than yelling "nigger" at an NAACP meeting.
As ML notes, we have tried to engage "Bobby" in discussion about his posting behavior and the affect is has on the Newswire. He'll have none of it. His behavior is nothing less than equivalent to attending a meeting and standing up and yelling whenever one feels like it rather than attempting to cooperate and take a turn.
Certainly, such tactics may be necessary when a point of view or idea is systematically ignored or filtered. Please note that "Bobby" was not filtered at all, yet he persisted in behaving as if he were--he assumed there would be censorship before there ever was. Nonetheless, his behavior is inappropriate--more for the frequency of his posts than their actual content.
There will be occasional "cranks," conspiracy theories, rants and other posts that are damn difficult to make any sense out of that. We accept that as inevitable side effect of having an open forum. But if we allow that use to take over we would be irresponsible and doing a disservice to those who wish and need to use this forum for constructive, cooperative purposes. Again, there is a crucial difference between my selfish rants about whatever I want to rant about and posting information and ideas that I hope will move a dialogue or lead to positive action.
To mistake these two things or confuse them will only degrade our efforts. |
