So Huffingtonpost censored Jesse Ventura?

[wowimthere]

I hope Huffingtonpost doesn't fall into the same lame bubble as the "mainstained" media. Jesse Ventura wrote an editorial questioning what he's always questioned... 9/11 and right after they posted it, they took his article down? He has a show on television about conspiracies so I hardly think asking questions about this topic is worth taking down from Huffingtonpost.

Doesn't Arianna question why the government is doing what it's doing? Don't alot of people question the governments role in our lives? Is she the only one who can ask questions about our government? Who decides what to question? This was a terrible decision especially since she ran it before removing it.

I'm going to start rethinking my position on reading Huffingtonpost if she keeps this up. I thought Huffingtonpost was supposed to be unbiased. I guess I was wrong.

[Zen Democrat]

1. It appears that questions about 9/11 are the new "third rail" ... n/t

[Electric Monk]

4. So much so that I bet this thread gets dungeoned

even though it's about Huffington Post and censorship and Jesse Ventura.

[Echo In Light]

15. Count on it

[SpiralHawk]

24. "Smirk.' - xCommander AWOL (R)

[hack89]

21. Accepting Truthers while attacking Birthers would be hypocritical

the Birthers are the best thing to happen to Democrats in a long time - lets not muddy the waters. Especially since at least one prominent birther is also a big truther.

[conscious evolution]

35. Its been a third rail here on DU for years now.

Any OP that brings it up gets thrown in the dungeon for life.
Out of sight out of mind leads to easy forgetting.

[mfcorey1]

2. Lately I have found that they censor anything that

....criticizes the right. They write many articles that are demeaning of the FlOTUS. Anytime they refer to her clothing it is always a frock. Everyone else wears a dress. I find myself using them less and less.

[petersjo02]

3. That's been my experience with HuffPo lately, too.

I pick and choose very carefully what I read there.

[valerief]

5. Huffpo? Oh, I remember them. They're so 00s. nt

[lunatica]

6. Huffingtonpost just irritates me

It's a gossip site that throws in some serious political stuff to pretend otherwise.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

7. Listen, if even the woo woos over at Huffington Post won't run a tin foil story...

then just maybe there's a problem with the story.

[MrMickeysMom]

9. Maybe there's just something wrong with the media...

... You ever think of that?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

11. Yeah, there's something wrong with Huffington Post.

There are too many fucking woo woos.

[MrMickeysMom]

14. Okay, if you say so...

[MrMickeysMom]

8. They want NOTHING to do with "conspiracy"!

Woooohhh! THINK of it! Someone who has been trained as a Navy Seal and told during that time, "you must think like the enemy to understand the enemy". When you look at the military's early experiences, the assassinations and then someone who is bold enough to run and win office, only to keep riding the edge.... Well..... that's just TOO FUCKIN SCARY for the Huffington Post.

What a bunch of bullshit they're turning into.

[Echo In Light]

17. +1

[warm regards]

10. The Huffingtonpost did not censor anyone. Only the government can do that.

[corpseratemedia]

38. your sig line is idiotic

and so is your idea that only the government can censor

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[corpseratemedia]

53. Private entities can censor - they can decide what and what not to print, etc.

Cleary, you are fighting windmills. Please continue to enjoy paying for banker's misdeeds with your taxes. Privatizing the profits, socializing the losses, you "losers" pay. And I'm alerting you since your sig line and your latest assertion are both insulting and incorrect.


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/censors


Main Entry: 1cen·sor
Pronunciation: \?sen(t)-s?r\
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin, Roman magistrate, from censïre to give as one's opinion, assess; perhaps akin to Sanskrit Êam?sati he praises
Date: 1526
1 : a person who supervises conduct and morals: as a : an official who examines materials (as publications or films) for objectionable matter b : an official (as in time of war) who reads communications (as letters) and deletes material considered sensitive or harmful
2 : one of two magistrates of early Rome acting as census takers, assessors, and inspectors of morals and conduct
3 : a hypothetical psychic agency that represses unacceptable notions before they

http://www.answers.com/topic/censor

Thesaurus:censorTop

Home > Library > Literature & Language > Thesaurus

verb

1. To examine (material) and remove parts considered harmful or improper for publication or transmission: bowdlerize, expurgate, screen. See include/exclude, show/hide.
2. To keep from being published or transmitted: ban, black out, hush (up), stifle, suppress. Idioms: keep/put a lid on.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship

Censorship is the suppression of speech or deletion of communicative material which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient to the government or media organizations as determined by a censor.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_censorship

Media conglomeration

One of the incidents of corporate censorship that Croteau and Hoynes find to be "the most disturbing" in their view<8> is the news reporting in the U.S. of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which made fundamental changes to the limitations on ownership of media conglomerates within the U.S. and which was heavily lobbied for by media interests, and yet which was subject to, in Croteau and Hoynes words, "remarkably little coverage" by U.S. news media. They report one study that found that in the 9 months between the introduction of the bill into Congress and its passage in February 1996, there were only 12 major stories, comprising 19.5 minutes of air time, about the Act on the three major U.S. television networks, with much of this coverage focussing upon television content ratings and the V-chip and "largely ignor" the major changes to the media ownership rules. Croteau and Hoynes observe that history repeated itself with the 2003 review by the FCC of the media ownership rules, with a study by American Journalism Review concluding that the plan to alter the ownership regulations in favour of "a handful of large companies" was "barely mentioned" by most newspapers and broadcast outlets that were owned by those companies.

Croteau and Hoynes<8> state that this "inadequate" coverage of the legislation and FCC actions suggests a built-in conflict of interest for news media — one that is not just limited to television and radio news media, given that many newspapers are also owned by the same corporations that own the television and radio stations. Reporting fully the views of critics of the legislation would have been counter to the economic interests of the news media companies which benefited directly from the legislation, lobbied in its favour, and even helped to draft it. This conflict of interest was observed by John McCain during debate of the Telecommunications Act in the U.S. Senate, who stated that "You will not see this story on any television or hear it on any radio broadcast because it directly affects them.". Sohn<12> similarly observed, in a 1998 critique of the deregulation by the Telecommunications Act, that increased concentration of media ownership "often leads to a type of corporate censorship by which information affecting the large media company's economic interest is kept from the public's eyes and ears".

Nichols and McChesney<9> similarly observe that the exclusion of Ralph Nader from the three presidential debates in the 2000 presidential race by television networks guaranteed that the debates would not address controversial issues of media conglomeration. They note with irony that this was seemingly against the self-interests of the television stations, since it served to also reduce public interest in the televised presidential debates by rendering them, in their view, "duller than dirt agreeathons" that viewers would not be interested in watching.

[Electric Monk]

54. Notice post #40 (Deleted message - Name removed) for another example. nt

[Warren Stupidity]

45. That is silly.

Institutions can and do practice censorship all the time.

[warm regards]

51. No, private institutions practice editorial discretion.

I do not have he right to make my points on huffingtonpost, Democratic Underground or any media that is privately controlled. Thus, I cannot be censored by these entities.

On the other hand, I have an inalienable right to free speech, which is backed up by the 1st Amendment, so I can create my own website, newspaper, or whatever. And no one can stop me from doing so except the government. As such, the government is the only entity that can censor me or anyone else.

[Warren Stupidity]

52. you've confused the right to free speech and censorship

censorship is simply the practice of suppressing speech. It is done all the time in private institutions, and in those situations you generally have no right of free speech so you cannot oppose the censorship. Only the government is constrained from practicing censorship, but that does not mean that only government suppression of speech is censorship.

[warm regards]

62. You are correct, there is an abundance of confusion with respect to this matter.

[SidDithers]

12. I think you don't know what censorship is...nt

Sid

[librechik]

13. IBTL

sometimes we censor ourselves just because it's easier than fighting a trend. Why has questioning authority gone out of style here? Too many unanswered questions and lies to let 9/11 alone. IMO

[Echo In Light]

18. When censorship and name-calling is all one side has...

... they'll rely on it to the nth degree

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

16. Jesse Ventura is a self-promoting crackpot.

I'm no fan of Huffingtonpost, but staying away from Jesse is not necessarily a bad thing. He's waaaay out there.

[Fumesucker]

19. Yes, he is certainly insane.. This is one of his craziest rants..

JESSE VENTURA, HOST: Imagine an alien suddenly dropped into the 21st century America. He goes to a Monday night football game and witnesses thousands of people guzzling a liquid refreshment as fast as vendors can supply it. Observing the spectacle of the game itself, the alien is constantly distracted by fans whose behavior seems to become more and more bizarre. He watches as fights break out between half-naked fans with painted bodies.

By the end of the contest, on the playing field, he notes that most of the people around him seem to have lost their ability to walk and for some reason, their speech has changed. Words are less audible. They seem to be talking in slow motion. Once the game is over, he watches the fans stumbling toward their cars, cursing and threatening other fans.
Clearly, the alien observes, something has caused these fans to have a mind-altering experience. But whatever is going on, it seems to be acceptable behavior for this society, because all the while, many police officers observe the behavior, but remain at a distance and don't interfere.

The next day, the alien attends a lecture on a college campus. After the lecture, he's invited by some students to a party. At the party, students are sitting around drawing smoke from a bottle-like structure with water in it. The smoke is inhaled into their bodies, the conversation is friendly, calm and respectful, and music is playing in the background. But all of a sudden, many police officers arrive with guns, grab the water-filled bottle, put handcuffs on everyone in the room, and take them off to jail. The alien is totally confused.

Welcome to the United States of America, the land of hypocrisy.

[Echo In Light]

20. "Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying ...

... or else you say something true, and it will sound like it's from Neptune." ~ Chomsky

[Fumesucker]

22. "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."

-George Orwell

Our society seems to be becoming ever more allergic to truth.

Erasmus thought that in the country of the blind the one eyed man is king, Erasmus was a flaming optimist.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

26. No, that's just a poorly written rant.

His 9-11 twoofer stuff is crazy. This piece is just like somebody trying to verbally describe a ripped off Tom Tomorrow comic.

[Fumesucker]

27. Opinions are like... err.. noses.. everyone has one..

And if you think the government version of 9/11 is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth then God help you.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

30. I think that 9-11 twoofers like Ventura are completely fucked in the head. Sideways.

And they've got no business telling other people what to think, given how irrevocably stupid they are.

[Fumesucker]

34. And I think that people who believe the goverment story is the truth, the whole truth..

And nothing but the truth are fucked in the head. Sideways..

[Echo In Light]

56. Notice how it's the most rude, belligerent DUers who are the LOUDEST re their hatred of "twoofers."

Connection?

Absolutely

[Warren Stupidity]

42. All Hail The Official Story!

[Ter]

36. Not crazy at all

I agree 100%.

[damyank913]

58. He's a media whore. I'm surprised he's not out there with the tea baggers.

[Garbo 2004]

23. HuffPo says Ventura's article violated their blogger guidelines:

Editor's Note: The Huffington Post's editorial policy, laid out in our blogger guidelines, prohibits the promotion and promulgation of conspiracy theories -- including those about 9/11. As such, we have removed this post.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-ventura/for-some-the-search-for-w_b_491504.html

[slampoet]

25. They will let Union-Busting Russel Simmons criticize banks when he owns a Debit Card company.....

....that exploits poor people in areas w/o banks but they call Ventura's opinions a conspiracy.

[Fumesucker]

29. The *official* story of the events of 9/11 is "a conspiracy theory".. n/t

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

31. Well, it's not really a theory.

It actually happened.

[Fumesucker]

33. I'm being generous and using "theory" in the scientific sense..

And no matter how it happened it was a conspiracy since more than one person was involved.

[troubledamerican]

39. That went right over HighFructose's head.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

46. No, I got it.

It's just a stupid comparison. The fact that 9-11 involved conspirers does not make it equivalent to a conspiracy theory, in the colloquial.

I mean, please. This is twoofer shit. There's nothing to get. It's really base stupidity.

[LostInAnomie]

28. They probably needed the space for a story about homeopathy or some other woo bullshit.

[JoeyT]

32. They claim he violated their policy against conspiracy theories.

Next time he should claim Big Pharma were responsible for 9/11.
They'll eat that up.

[Spazito]

37. It really is Huff & Puff, imo...

They are either huffing about issues with only half the facts in hand or doing celebrity puff pieces. It has become a pathetic site, imo.

[Warren Stupidity]

41. DU censors 9-11 discussions

perhaps you should also rethink your position on posting here?

[SidDithers]

43. Another poster who doesn't know the meaning of the word "censor"...nt

Sid

[Warren Stupidity]

44. go ahead and explain how the 9-11 dungeon is not a form of censorship

here on DU. I'll listen patiently and politely.

[SidDithers]

48. Because this is a private site...

and we all agree to post here under the terms and conditions set out by the site owners.

On their site, they choose to have discussions about 9/11 contained in a separate forum, which is open to all members, just as sports discussions are contianed in the Sports forum, health discussions are contained in the Health forum, discussions about religion in R/T.

You think you're being censored because you can't discuss 9/11 wherever you want to, but at DU, that right was never yours to begin with.

Sid

[Warren Stupidity]

50. private does not negate censorship

nor does our agreement to be censored negate censorship. The various dungeons here are mild forms of censorship. I generally don't discuss 9-11, but the fact that discussions about the politics of 9-11, guns, israel/palestine, etc. are banned from the general political discussion forum is a form of censorship imposed on us here at DU by the owners of the forum.

Wiki:

"Censorship is the suppression of speech or deletion of communicative material which may be considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient to the government or media organizations as determined by a censor."

A forum is a type of media organization and this forum's moderators, like many forums, are its censors, acting in the interests of the owners of the forum to suppress speech here. The fact that this is their site in no way alters the fact that this site censors speech here.

[SidDithers]

55. You're absolutely not being prevented from posting whatever you want about 9/11...

nobody is stopping you from discussing that topic in the least.

You not being able to post wherever you want is not censorship, it's housekeeping.

A forum is not a media organization, it's a living room.

Sid

[Warren Stupidity]

60. The dungeons here are a form of censorship.

You are being obtuse.

[SidDithers]

61. You can discuss whatever you want...

and yet are still crying censorship.

But I'm being obtuse.

Got it.

Sid

[ShamelessHussy]

47. no one is allowed to question what happened that horrific day - which speaks volumes all by itself

it is obvious that those 3 buildings in NYC were brought down by CD.

once you accept that fact, you then realize that there is no way that a gang of thugs hiding in caves, worlds away, could have pulled that off, there is only one conclusion left.

elements of the shadow gov did it.

[Junkdrawer]

63. Yep. And the truth is protected by a wall of denial....

Most people just don't want to live in a world where that can happen. So they don't.

[rcrush]

49. HUFFPO took it down because it doesn't have celebrity boobs in it!

Thats all Huffpo is good for now. Celeb Nip Slips.

[TheWebHead]

57. they censor about 30% of my comments

and censor means delete without explanation, even when no personal comments are made but simply an opposing viewpoint.

[rcrush]

59. Wait if HUFFPO says they don't post conspiracy theories then what is this?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jenny-mccarthy/whos-afraid-of-the-truth_b_490918.html

Technically doesn't this count as a "Conspiracy Theory"?