Censorship

judgement


Does anybody else here find it 'interesting' that the very first response to the OP was by the site owner?

You wanna talk about Conspiracy! lol

reply to post by seabag


Yes, that is what I was saying. My ideal would be a forum where logic and some kind of documentation would be asked for to discuss said outrageous/controversial theories. I only contribute if I have some kind of reliable information. I just read and research what is theorized. Just because it's controversial doesn't make some theories untrue, or true.
I don't know where to go to discuss controversial theories, responsibly, compassionately, logically and openly.

reply to post by olaru12

The MSM is a for profit enterprise just like ATS. The networks have rooms full of people trying to figure out how to get better ratings than the competition; thus sell more advertising. Capitalism at it's finest. Give the audience what they want. Doing business the American way; catering to a confederacy of dunces.

ATS isn’t a mainstream news site per se.

Members of ATS cannot contribute “news” on ABC’s website. We are not professional journalists nor are we bound by their ethical code. There is a certain expectation of reliability and truthfulness from the MSM. As I said, we expect truth from them rather than speculation, sensationalism and distractions. They used to expect that of themselves.....but not anymore.

Evil capitalism, huh?

Corruption is not inherent to capitalism nor is it any more prevalent…corruption can be found in every form of government and every enterprise.

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by olaru12

 

The MSM is a for profit enterprise just like ATS. The networks have rooms full of people trying to figure out how to get better ratings than the competition; thus sell more advertising. Capitalism at it's finest. Give the audience what they want. Doing business the American way; catering to a confederacy of dunces.

ATS isn’t a mainstream news site per se.

Members of ATS cannot contribute “news” on ABC’s website. We are not professional journalists nor are we bound by their ethical code. There is a certain expectation of reliability and truthfulness from the MSM. As I said, we expect truth from them rather than speculation, sensationalism and distractions. They used to expect that of themselves.....but not anymore.

Evil capitalism, huh?

Most people can't handle the truth and don't want to hear it anyway, so they get what they want, sensationalism and entertainment. Yeah, business the American way! Ethical code.....

It's a brave new world, 1984 at it's finest and the future looks very strange. Blade runner anyone? Corporate fascism? WalMartopia....

Originally posted by FractalChaos13242017
judgement

edit on 26-12-2012 by FractalChaos13242017 because: a

Does anybody else here find it 'interesting' that the very first response to the OP was by the site owner?

You wanna talk about Conspiracy! lol

edit on 26-12-2012 by FractalChaos13242017 because: clarification

Oh wow!

I didn't realize that not only was the site owner the first to respond. But, multiple 'Mods' or even 'Super Moderators' responded!!!

Ok guys, time to fess up. What's 'really' going on here. Why the instant responses from the administration to this post?

Maybe I'm just being paranoid or something lol.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by hypattia
I was referring to the MAINSTREAM MEDIA, not ATS.

Which are also independent companies under no obligation to enforce or practice free speech.

I was referring to the MAINSTREAM MEDIA'S obligation to the public thru it's Ethics and Standards:en.wikipedia.org...

Journalism ethics and standards comprise principles of ethics and of good practice as applicable to the specific challenges faced by journalists. Historically and currently, this subset of media ethics is widely known to journalists as their professional "code of ethics" or the "canons of journalism".[1] The basic codes and canons commonly appear in statements drafted by both professional journalism associations and individual print, broadcast, and online news organizations.

While various existing codes have some differences, most share common elements including the principles of — truthfulness, accuracy, objectivity, impartiality, fairness and public accountability — as these apply to the acquisition of newsworthy information and its subsequent dissemination to the public.[2][3][4][5]

reply to post by FractalChaos13242017


You dont suppose that they are the first to respond because they are accused of censoring thing ad nauseum? That it is in their best interest to call out these accusations, and squash them immediately, as they are damaging to the site?

Or maybe that this is, oh, say, the millionth thread on this subject?

reply to post by olaru12

Most people can't handle the truth; so they get what they want, sensationalism and entertainment. Yeah, business the American way!

I know what you’re saying. The MSM does have an agenda....but it isn’t ratings. Many people today wouldn’t recognize the truth if it bit them; they allow themselves to be disengaged and distracted because its easier (I'm as guilty as anyone). Some people don't want to deal with the truth and the MSM is doing its best to keep the truth from us all. That is a dangerous combination.

This is not an American (or capitalist) phenomenon BTW….have you studied the history of Rome?

reply to post by captaintyinknots


But there's no conspiracy in that... You big party pooper, you!

Originally posted by FractalChaos13242017
I didn't realize that not only was the site owner the first to respond. But, multiple 'Mods' or even 'Super Moderators' responded!!!

Dude, check my post count. I'll be at 50,000 within 2 weeks. No conspiracy as far as I'm concerned. I just have a big mouth. I have an opinion about EVERYTHING!

ETA: Ask anyone.

Originally posted by forgetmenot
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

But there's no conspiracy in that... You big party pooper, you!

I know, I know, I must be a troll/disinfo agent/shill, since I bring logic to these situations

reply to post by intrepid


You're not gonna make it.... you're getting banned at 49,999

Originally posted by elevatedone
reply to post by intrepid

 

You're not gonna make it.... you're getting banned at 49,999

STOP CENSORING ME!!!!

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by FractalChaos13242017

 

You dont suppose that they are the first to respond because they are accused of censoring thing ad nauseum? That it is in their best interest to call out these accusations, and squash them immediately, as they are damaging to the site?

Or maybe that this is, oh, say, the millionth thread on this subject?

Wait, so there's that many issues with censorship on ATS, that you'd go as far to say that this is the "millionth thread on this subject"?

Ok, I don't even know where to begin with the implications of that statement lol. Lets not go down that rabbit hole. lol

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by FractalChaos13242017
I didn't realize that not only was the site owner the first to respond. But, multiple 'Mods' or even 'Super Moderators' responded!!!

Dude, check my post count. I'll be at 50,000 within 2 weeks. No conspiracy as far as I'm concerned. I just have a big mouth. I have an opinion about EVERYTHING!

ETA: Ask anyone.

I can vouch for that!

Regardless, its no surprise mods come out of the woodwork when they have been called out....stands to reason!

Would it feed the conspiracy if they remained silent??

Originally posted by FractalChaos13242017

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by FractalChaos13242017

 

You dont suppose that they are the first to respond because they are accused of censoring thing ad nauseum? That it is in their best interest to call out these accusations, and squash them immediately, as they are damaging to the site?

Or maybe that this is, oh, say, the millionth thread on this subject?

Wait, so there's that many issues with censorship on ATS, that you'd go as far to say that this is the "millionth thread on this subject"?

Ok, I don't even know where to begin with the implications of that statement lol. Lets not go down that rabbit hole. lol

SO now accusing one of censorship without understanding what censorship means shows that there is a big issue with it? Every time someone starts a thread on it, it means that they were censored?

Come on now. Just about any time someone gets a post removed for violating TOS, they scream CENSORSHIP! that doesnt make it so.

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by FractalChaos13242017
I didn't realize that not only was the site owner the first to respond. But, multiple 'Mods' or even 'Super Moderators' responded!!!

Dude, check my post count. I'll be at 50,000 within 2 weeks. No conspiracy as far as I'm concerned. I just have a big mouth. I have an opinion about EVERYTHING!

ETA: Ask anyone.

edit on 26-12-2012 by intrepid because: (no reason given)

You seriously expect me to believe that it was just by 'chance' or because you are opinionated that you decided to be among the first to reply to a thread in which the first response was by the Site Owner, and followed by other Moderators of the website?

Especially considering the context of the OP!?!

I swear, the word GULLIBLE is NOT written on the ceiling!

reply to post by FractalChaos13242017


Thus the levity. The membership goes through these threads almost weekly. It becomes tedious. Some are ignorant when it comes to the 2nd. Hopefully we can help them with that. Some are intentionally obtuse. Nothing you can do about that.

reply to post by hypattia


I am considering writing a book on the cancer of the entitlement mentality that seems so prevalent in today's culture. Your post and attitude exemplifies this entitlement mentality perfectly.

Here's an idea.

Go to Godaddy and register a domain name. Get a hosting account. Create a website, and blah, blah, blah your theories until your heart's content.

This is SO's site, not ours. He can run it as he sees fit. You have no "right" to anything to do with posting on this site.

Originally posted by FractalChaos13242017
judgement

edit on 26-12-2012 by FractalChaos13242017 because: a

Does anybody else here find it 'interesting' that the very first response to the OP was by the site owner?

You wanna talk about Conspiracy! lol

edit on 26-12-2012 by FractalChaos13242017 because: clarification

No, it's not interesting, it's perfectly understandable. It's not a conspiracy when the owner of a business participates in making his business better by enforcing his own standards.

What's more interesting is the mindset of those who use ATS as if they have some fundamental entitlement to use it how they see fit, not how the owner sees fit.