It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Popular news sites are suppressing free speech. Watch out for yourself.

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2012 @ 08:53 PM
link   
Textg

Recently foxnews.com very quietly started phasing out the ability to "comment" on any of the articles posted on their site. They started with controversial subjects such as the Trayvon Martin case and dwindled it down to obscure science and entertainment stories. Now you cannot comment on them. You can't comment on anything.

CNN dot com is now blocking individuals who have not even broken the terms of service agreement. If you do not fall in line with their political and social views, you will be blocked. Even quasi-CNN sites are now not posting comments real-time. They have to be passed through "moderation", even though the technology exists to flag posts with certain terms or phrases. If the government can produce a list of terms that will put you on your watch list, you better believe that those in bed with them can do the same. You may find this harmless and petty. The fact that "both sides" are cracking down at the same time speaks to me on a level I find very dangerous.

People, this is the 1940's and Germany all over again. It starts out like the small warm flame of a candle until it becomes a raging out of control fire. We sit idly by day by day as our liberties are stripped from us. We can't go anywhere without being photographed, we can't write anything without the possibility that Big Bro is right on top of us. Perhaps if you post enough content that really angers them, you'll find yourself in a bad situation.

Ladies and Gentlemen I give you Andrew Breitbart.

Nuff said?




posted on May, 29 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   
You can comment about their stories, they just don't want to support it on their website. "Suppressing free speech?" I don't see it. Comment about their stories here if you want to.


They have to be passed through "moderation", even though the technology exists to flag posts with certain terms or phrases.
When you get exposed to the moderators on this site, remember to stay cool. This is a privately owned site which can make its own rules, just like CNN and FOX.



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 09:11 PM
link   
There is no such thing as free speech on internet forums and news sites. When you join these sites you agree to the terms they set forth. So it's their way or the highway.



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 10:20 PM
link   
...

"If you do not fall in line with their political and social views, you will be blocked."

That pretty much says it. Anyway, my thought on it goes thusly: People are waking up. (Slowly, true.) They're raising hell and disagreeing where they were quiet and passive before. The last thing CNN wants is to have their message watered-down or mixed. They want -their- message to be the one that's swallowed; not some dissident nut's message....

ETA: S&F nonetheless, particularly for your comment on Nazi Germany in the '40s. I'm not sure whether we're in for Nazism, Fascism, or Communism--or some completely other form of -ism. But we're in for some s---stormism, that's for sure....
edit on 5/29/2012 by Ex_CT2 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 11:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by flashtrum

Recently foxnews.com very quietly started phasing out the ability to "comment" on any of the articles posted on their site. They started with controversial subjects such as the Trayvon Martin case and dwindled it down to obscure science and entertainment stories. Now you cannot comment on them. You can't comment on anything.

CNN dot com is now blocking individuals who have not even broken the terms of service agreement.


I am a huge proponent of free speech but I think you fail to see the grasp of a private entity deciding what they will allow users (users that have willfully agreed to be part of their "commentary") do and not do. It isn't suppression of free speech.

If the market wants a free and open forum, it will come about and these sites will lose out on viewership, ratings and advertisements because of their decision.


The fact that "both sides" are cracking down at the same time speaks to me on a level I find very dangerous.


Minus the bickering calls from side A that says they are for side B and vice versa, it is still a private entity invoking the age old sign we see everywhere "All Rights Reserved".


People, this is the 1940's and Germany all over again. It starts out like the small warm flame of a candle until it becomes a raging out of control fire. We sit idly by day by day as our liberties are stripped from us. We can't go anywhere without being photographed, we can't write anything without the possibility that Big Bro is right on top of us. Perhaps if you post enough content that really angers them, you'll find yourself in a bad situation.


Things are dwindling, but you are focusing your energy in an area where it was meant to be a choice to the company, individual, whatever to decide the speech it allowed to be had.



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 11:42 PM
link   
I got banned from Sean Hannity's site during the Bush years.

It's nothing new.

T&C is everywhere.



posted on May, 29 2012 @ 11:43 PM
link   
Who comments at Fox News or CNN or MSNBC, and all the others ?

That is why we have ATS people comment away about anything you want and you can be left,right, or independent.

Doesn't matter this is the place that has the most varitey where news comes to you.




posted on May, 29 2012 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by flashtrum
People, this is the 1940's and Germany all over again.


You must be sooooooo young. It makes me sad. I am not that old. It was not long ago that there were no websites to comment on. You could not comment on the TV. Well you could but only people in the room with you heard it. This is actually just America 1990's all over again, except you can read the news for free anytime, anywhere.

Cry me a river.



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 09:46 AM
link   
reply to post by buster2010
 


I understand that. Part of my point was that if a user doesn't violate terms of service, there must be another reason. When I read that other users had the same issues, it gets me thinking.

The other part of my point is that two popular media websites from both sides of the political spectrum are clamping down on people expressing their opinions on a given news story. Sure it's their "right" but is it "right"?

We've sat idly by while our liberties were stripped from us (this is the broader argument I am bringing forth). After 9/11 the government decided they could listen to certain phone conversations, and even the Patriot Act has been expanded (where traditionally liberties taken away during war time are given back). I hope the poster who said people are starting to wake up is right, but I am afraid that we a're heading in the other direction.



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Autumnal
 


Please read my other reply. Two arguments - news sites (liberal and conservative) clamping down on readers they don't agree with, broader argument that our liberties are rapidly eroding.

Keep your river, there may be a drought.



posted on May, 30 2012 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by flashtrum
reply to post by Autumnal
 


Please read my other reply. Two arguments - news sites (liberal and conservative) clamping down on readers they don't agree with, broader argument that our liberties are rapidly eroding.

That is a paranoid delusion. I do not subscribe to any of those sites. Do I have less free speech than you do?
Please answer honestly.


Keep your river, there may be a drought.

You cannot write stuff on CNN's website? OK, can you write stuff?



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by flashtrum
We've sat idly by while our liberties were stripped from us (this is the broader argument I am bringing forth).


Than focus the argument towards Government for doing such -- a private company deciding arbitrarily who gets to stand on a soap box and who doesn't, does not constitute to any liberties stripped away.

You make some good points but overall I think your energy is focused into something that isn't anything new (just like if an editor didn't print your opinion when you wrote them for the Sunday Times).
edit on 31-5-2012 by ownbestenemy because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 31 2012 @ 02:22 AM
link   
They are private message boards however there is banning if you don`t tow the line or question ``authority``
It`s sad but just remember their tactics and boycott if you must. CNN is on life support and for good reason. They have been caught lying and such



posted on Jun, 14 2012 @ 09:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by flashtrum
Textg

Recently foxnews.com very quietly started phasing out the ability to "comment" on any of the articles posted on their site. They started with controversial subjects such as the Trayvon Martin case and dwindled it down to obscure science and entertainment stories. Now you cannot comment on them. You can't comment on anything.

CNN dot com is now blocking individuals who have not even broken the terms of service agreement. If you do not fall in line with their political and social views, you will be blocked. Even quasi-CNN sites are now not posting comments real-time. They have to be passed through "moderation", even though the technology exists to flag posts with certain terms or phrases. If the government can produce a list of terms that will put you on your watch list, you better believe that those in bed with them can do the same. You may find this harmless and petty. The fact that "both sides" are cracking down at the same time speaks to me on a level I find very dangerous.

People, this is the 1940's and Germany all over again. It starts out like the small warm flame of a candle until it becomes a raging out of control fire. We sit idly by day by day as our liberties are stripped from us. We can't go anywhere without being photographed, we can't write anything without the possibility that Big Bro is right on top of us. Perhaps if you post enough content that really angers them, you'll find yourself in a bad situation.

Ladies and Gentlemen I give you Andrew Breitbart.

Nuff said?



1930's, not 1940's. Such as 2012.talkingpointsmemo.com... for example.



new topics

top topics



 
7

log in

join