Censorship out of control on the Huffington Post

[JamesA1102]

On Monday I posted a rebuttal to part of a column that Joe Scarborough had written for HuffPo. Initially my post was allowed through although comments were 'Fully Moderated' for that column. When I checked back yesterday, my post had been removed by the HuffPo moderators without any explaination. My post broke none of their rules and was a simple factual rebuttal to something Scarborough included in his column which is probably why it was initially put through. However, later someone came along deleted my post.

Now as others here have noted the moderation over at HuffPo has devolved into censorship. I've also noticed that more and more columns and articles there are 'Fully Moderated'. Anything written by Arianna herself is always fully moderated. Columns and articles by and about certain friends of Arianna such as the Morning Joe crowd are always fully moderated. The situation as really out of control. How can Arianna claim that her site is progressive when it practices this kind of censorship?

I would like to suggest that a new discussion board catagory be created here specifically for posting comments that have been rejected by the Huffington Post. Then maybe those of us censored by HuffPo can be heard.

[old mark]

1. I have posted at least 10 replies/comments to articles there.

One got published, the rest disappeared.

I don't bother to read it anymore-and after I saw her on MSNBC the other night, I won't bother to go back.
She is a real asshole.

mark

[flyarm]

2. during the primaries any comments that exposed Obama and his campaign that were not 100% positive

and exposed the truth about Obama and where he stood on many liberal and progressive principles..were also censored..welcome to the real world of the internet!!

[depakid]

71. Now THAT revelation will cause certain head to explode!

:D

[lunatica]

3. Huffingtonpost just irritates me to no end.

Their snark and headlines are too unclever. I try to go over there to see if anything has improved and it never does. I won't even visit some of my favorite posters anymore.

I've also tried for well over a year to get unsubscribed but can't find a way to do it.

[tblue37]

22. I also have noticed that HuffPo causes trouble for my

computer. It takes forever to load, and the screen often jumps around while you e trying to view an article. I think they have a lot of junk there that wreaks havoc with one's computer. Also, if I don't close a HuffPo screen within a few minutes, my computer often freezes up and I have to reboot. No other site causes me such trouble.

[Jamastiene]

46. I noticed that too with my computer.

Also, the constant loading of the Twitter thing across the bottom of the screen slows it down more than anything. I can't AdBlock it. I can't close it fast enough before my processor and fans on my computer go into full speed because it takes so much processing power to load that part.

[Don Caballero]

4. They have been very anti-Obama lately

I just can't go there anymore to get reliable news

[flyarm]

6. they were "ONLY OBAMA" during the primaries..maybe they have buyers remorse? eom

[Don Caballero]

7. At least here on DU I am able to defend the President without my comments being censored.

[flyarm]

8. and at least on DU we were able to expose the lies of Obama during the primaries..

seems things go both ways eh?

[Don Caballero]

15. What lies?

Please be specific

[Iggo]

47. Yeah, I'd like to see that, too.

B-)

[zanana1]

27. This is just a guess, but....

Were you a Hillary supporter?

[flyarm]

31. no! eom

[apocalypsehow]

53. Who are you trying to kid?

:shrug:

[flyarm]

61. I supported Edwards and worked on his campaign and dropped out completely when i learned what a

scum bag he was and how i was used and my money was used and abused!

I saw shit in Iowa, SC and Fla that would not allow me to support Obama during the primary..

I am a former ELECTED Delegate for my state and when Obama and his people stole votes in my state and threw out our delegate votes i would not support that.I saw first hand the workings of Rahm.. my democratic principles and values would not tolerate what was done to the Voters of my state!

The voters of my state voted, and had their votes stolen ..I still stand behind their vote.

My vote was for Edwards..not that it was counted, it wasn't..and I do deem him to be the scum of the earth today!

[Don Caballero]

48. I first supported Edwards

but became a huge fan of President Obama and campaigned for him for months. Never really liked Hillary.

[JamesA1102]

12. I think they were more anti-Hillary then nt

[flyarm]

17. they were anti anyone "BUT" Obama..you could not post anything at Huff that was not 100% pro Obama!

or it was censored.

I was not pro Hillary!..or Obama..and was censored daily at Huff Post.

Like i said..maybe Huff post has buyers remorse????

maybe they didn't get the payoffs they were promised perhaps?????

[Iggo]

59. To me, a voter without a horse in that race,...

...it seemed pretty even until near the end when it started to become obvious who would win. Then it got a little nasty, with the piling on from one side and the GCW flameouts from the other.

[monmouth]

5. They are going on and on how Democrats are "losing" so many

critters. No mention whatsoever that Repubs are losing more. That site is becoming insufferable and I too, especially on Sunday's Linkins Sunday morning column, hardly get printed. I follow all of the rules, etc. but rarely see my posts...

[Enrique]

16. "Republican retirements still outnumber democratic ones, despite spin"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/politics/

also on that page, "Worst cash flow in decade" with a huge picture of Michael Steele.

[monmouth]

25. I did see that when I went to the post page. Didn't see it earlier....n/t

[zanana1]

70. Does anybody remember that Arianna was once a conservative pain in the ass? nt

[Berry Cool]

9. I don't always like HuffPo, but what you describe is not "censorship."

They are editing the site as they please, and apparently they are removing things that for some reason they don't like politically. But that's not censorship.

Censorship is when the government silences you and you can't get your stuff posted anywhere. The HuffPo isn't the government, it's a private enterprise and has the right to pick and choose what it publishes or remove what it has already published, even if you disagree.

Also, as you point out, you are free to take your writing elsewhere and post it. If you were truly being censored, you would not be able to post it anyplace at all.

[BlooInBloo]

11. Censor is not restricted to just government, as you appear to believe.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

23. Exercising editorial control is not "censorship."

[paulsby]

63. you guys are wanking over the definition of a word

and this EXACT same argument constantly comes up here.

censorship has negative connotations, so some people don't want to use "censor". they use "moderate" or "exert editorial control"

regardless, we all know (or should) that a private venue can and does censor ideas.

DU certainly does.

so frigging what?

these aren't public venues. if you go to the town commons and start spewing about obama sucking on gay rights and yer local cop comes and shuts you up, THAT's the kind of censorship we abhor (and that is unconstitutional). but this site could not BE democraticunderground, if all ideas were given equal consideration and not erased/tombstoned.

duh

that's censorship. you are correct.

[PVnRT]

29. So, if I put a big banner on your house saying I LOVE NAZIS

and you tear it down, you're practicing censorship? Good to know.

[Shagbark Hickory]

32. That's slander tho.

[Berry Cool]

38. Yes it is.

When a private entity decides not to publish something, or reverses its stance on publishing something, that's editorial decision-making, not censorship.

[JamesA1102]

13. Interesting point.

But then their guidelines should say that they will edit out or delete anything they don't like politically. That would just be honest.

[L0oniX]

10. It's my sand box!

[havocmom]

14. Huff Post: More and more ARTICLES are fully fluff too

no longer on my daily reading list

[mochajava666]

20. Noticed more fluff too, also misleading headlines

I still check out Huffington Post often, but not as much. DU is now my #1 site, but HuffPo is still second. I'm hoping that it will get better by responding to the growing criticism.

[havocmom]

28. have bumped alternet.org up on my moring reading

Much more substance for breakfast! ;)

[mochajava666]

33. Thanks. I'll give that site a try

[butterfly77]

18. Me too..

the posts to scarbourough,and I said the same thing as my posts began to disappear.

[JamesA1102]

34. Yes, Joe and Mika seem to be friends of hers.

She's on their show all the time so it seems she protecting them.

[butterfly77]

36. Watch how they signal each other,,,

as well as other guests with their eye contact when they all want to be in sync on something I guess they talked about during commerical breaks..

[muriel_volestrangler]

19. I can think of few more boring ideas for a group than "Removed from Huffington Post"

And I can't for the life of me imagine why you think it should be part of DU.

If you care that much, start a blog about it, and your fellow sufferers can post their deleted comments as comments on it.

[tblue37]

21. I am severely hearing impaired. One article about a year ago

by a psychologist made a comment about what a terrible burden a deaf or hearing impaired child would be to a parent. I wrote a comment suggesting that most deaf people and most of their parents might find that offensive. My comment was not allowed to post.

[Greyhound]

24. HuffPo is committed to becoming the "new media", and as such, is

far more interested in attracting more celebrity contributors than the comments of us "useless eaters".

Don't ever forget who and what Ariana is, parasite class through and through.

They may be unprincipled, voracious thieves, but they are not stupid. This is the battle ground and they are fighting to win.

[MicaelS]

69. Bang you nailed it.....

HuffPo is committed to becoming the "new media", and as such, is far more interested in attracting more celebrity contributors than the comments of us "useless eaters".

The darlings of HuffPo are celebrities. It's definitely becoming an infotainment 'site.

[flyarm]

26. oh and there is no censorship all over the internet, there is censroship all over this country and

hypocracy about it!
Everyone knows AT&T and the telecoms are still watching and listening to our phone calls and reading our emails..censorship?? fuck they have an eye on everything we are doing and our democratic leadership just lets it keep going on..with carte blanche..the desensitizing is out of control..you only think something is censored if it happens to YOU!

Go look up desensitize..you are living it!

take a look at this thread and tell me there is no censorship here!

And that is the problem..they have set it up like that on purpose..it has gone on in the media..it has and is going on all over the internet..how can you come on here and bitch about being censored when unrec'ing is censoring..you are part of a community that is doing the same thing..it just makes me laugh..many of us were censored that brought up hypocracys , lies and bullshit about Obama at Huff Post during the whole primary!

That is why we are divided because they keep tossing the ping pong ball back and forth..hypocrites are all over the place with no credibility because of censorship everywhere..so you are desensitized to any censorship unless it directly effects and involves you! Even though you may be directly participating in censorship yourself.

You may think censorship is ok, if it is your "TEAM" censoring..BUT THAT IS NOT DEMOCRACY! JUST RECALL HOW ENRAGED WE WERE WHEN WE WERE BEING CENSORED BY THE OTHER "TEAM".. if you are not enraged by all censorship you are being a hypocrite..and that is why no one is listening , because no one is standing firm on principles and true values of democracy!

If you can't get that..than there is nothing anyone can do to make you understand the hypocracy and the lack of credibility everywhere.

Now they have all completed their mission and the democrats and republicans and independants alike have helped them knowingly or unknowingly put censorship in place by participating in this straw man game.

check out the censorship here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7399227

and read through this thread..but realize sub threads i read last night have been removed..where people were told to stfu..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7402222#7403741

many here know what kind of censorship is going on here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7402222#7404396

funny the whinning going on about Huffington Post is not equally being expressed about what is going on here..

[dionysus]

39. a moderated message board is not censorship. if your shit got deleted it was because it broke rules.

you can rage away all you want about being oppressed, but it doesnt make it true.

[flyarm]

43. you have totally missed my point!!..eom

[JamesA1102]

55. Mine didn't break the rules.

It was initially put through by one of their moderators and then deleted afterwards.

[Berry Cool]

40. You are confusing "censorship" with "board self-policing."

Again, this is not censorship. This is DU mods deciding what stays and what goes. They have a perfect right. The comments that are removed from DU can be made other places.

[flyarm]

44. huff post is moderated as well and that is what this thread is about..

again ..you have missed my point!

[lunatica]

30. Huffpo has taken on a smarmy gossipy tendency

[SemiCharmedQuark]

35. It's not censorship. It's the way they want to run their crappy site.

So just don't go there.

[dionysus]

37. unfortunately, as a privately owned site, they can delete what they want. i agree it's low brow...

[Berry Cool]

41. Good Lord, if you write a letter to the editor at a paper and they don't publish it,

is that "censorship"?

If you submit an article to a magazine and they don't choose to buy and publish it, is that censorship?

It's my opinion that a hell of a lot of people alive today wouldn't know what REAL censorship was if it bit them in the ass. They're about as mature as a nine-year-old who uses a four-letter word and cries "Censorship!" when his parents yell at him for it.

[dionysus]

42. i find the breathless, unhinged tantrums kind of funny though.

[JamesA1102]

52. I think you missed my point.

I submitted the post and it was approved by the moderators and then someone deleted it afterwards.

[PHIMG]

45. Shoudl we trust Arianana? She came from the dark side after all.

[Call Me Wesley]

49. Welcome to private websites.

It's not 'censorship.' They are allowed, by any means, to do as they please. It's their bandwidth you're using, and if you don't like it, start your own website - but don't add free comments or even a forum, otherwise you might end up 'censoring' something you don't want on your own private website.

That's how the cookie crumbles, sorry to say.

[JamesA1102]

54. True but my point is that they seem to be breaking their own policy

I'm post was originally approved by one of their moderators and then deleted later. Also the seem to apply one set of rules to some who's columns are 'Fully moderated' and another set of rules for other's who's columns are not.

[Call Me Wesley]

58. They can even break their own policy

as much they want to. They can put up rules and enforce totally other things. As I said, they can do whatever they like to do with it. Like setting background to purple and play 'Onward Christian Soldier' midis when you visit it. That's how it goes.

Did you take it up with the administration there?

If you want to have your opinion out there, start your own blog or website, and have your own safe heaven.

[CK_John]

50. In the past I posted that HP and NYT will merge and I believe that is still her goal. n/t

[backscatter712]

51. I can't take the Arianna Huff & Puff seriously anymore.

Arianna's become a drama queen, the Huff & Puff's headlines tend to focus on either tearing down Democrats or useless celebrity gossip, the messaging system is unusable even without the censorship.

The entire site's a joke.

[Luminous Animal]

56. I think this is a good idea. Or start a new blog altogether

titled "Censored from HuffPo".

[Capn Sunshine]

57. Their board, their rules

bottom line, it's hardly public, it's for-profit.
So is DU. There's no purpose or upside to create a category criticizing another message board. GD is good enough.
You don't like it, don't go there and post. I love Arianna, but that site is so agenda laden that it's unreadable.

Let me take a moment and thank Skinner et al for not selling out like HuffPo did :hi:

[semillama]

60. Huffpo is a huge joke. Wash your hands and forget them

Their entire health section is a vast wasteland of pseudoscience and snake oil and they should be shunned just for that. It's a vanity website for Ariana and her selected celebrity/politico friends - the readers of the site aren't considered.

[moondust]

73. delete

[paulsby]

62. moderation is censorship. it's just a nice word for it

nobody has a "right" to be heard on huffpost, or any other privately run venue.

as long as the GOVERNMENT isn't suppressing your speech,... so what?

this site doesn't allow all viewpoints. why would you expect huffpost to?

[Bluenorthwest]

64. An annoying, glitchy website owned by

an annoying, glitchy woman. It is made to generate money to spend on vast mountains of cosmetics and catering in a crazed attempt to mount a one woman revitalization of the Montana Av. shopping area.

[aikoaiko]

65. Perhaps this foreshadows another Arianna political shift.

:shrug:

[ErinBerin84]

66. you know

before I even opened this thread, I figured it would be about a Scarborough column. I've seen this comment TONS of times (that they especially censor responses to Joe's articles). Maybe bc him and Arianna are friends?

[HipChick]

67. I was banned from Huffington Post

for a post defending Obama ..no warning..no explanation..nothing...yet r/w,teabaggers are allowed to post willy-nilly...I cannot stand Drama Queen Arianna, and her site is rapidly approaching National Enquirer status...I came to DU,and haven't been back

[JoeyT]

68. They're as anti-science as a teabagger rally.

Posting facts refuting one of their articles on woo will earn you a ban no matter how politely you do it.
It's not like it's any big loss to not be able to talk on Huffpo. Or read it for that matter.
I see no difference between HuffPo and the World Nut Daily.

[PizzaDriver]

72. it's out of control on a lot of blogs...not naming names...but... makes you wonder what america woul

would be like if blog owners got control of the Bill of Rights. scary.