Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Is Media Matters.org Withholding Or Scrubbing Opposing Viewpoints From Their Website?

(Edit: Spare me the face palm and the "Doh!" I knew how this was gonna end when I started it...)

After Joining mediamatters.org, I posted four comments on four different web articles. After each post I was informed that as a new member, each of my posts had to be cleared by an administrator prior to being posted on the site. Fair enough.
That was two days ago. None of my posts were ever allowed on the site. While they were all listed under the "My Comments" tab on the "myMediaMatters" last night, they have all been scrubbed from "mediaMatters" as of now (3 days later).

"myMediaMatters" is a users personal page, where among other things, a listing of all the users comments posted and awaiting approval are stored. Alas, several comments were posted to the same articles by other users, long after I had submitted comments.

It is important to note, that none of my comments violated even the most ambiguous reading of mediamatters.org's Terms of Use and none of them came close to "trolling", especially as compared to some of the hateful, vitriolic posts that were allowed onto the site.

My attempted contributions to Media Matters:

~One comment was on the alleged "Gotcha" tweet sent by a commentator at a right-wing website, regarding Obama's SCOTUS nominee. Media Matters swallowed the obviously bogus tweet, which according to other websites was sent for the purpose of seeing which left-wing commentator would run with it.

~Another comment discussed the history of the southern democrats involvement in slavery, and many democrats opposition to the civil rights bills passed in the 1960's. This was posted on an article claiming Rush Limbaugh supported slavery.

~A third comment gave some of the technical details of "Net Neutrality" which is a subject I am well versed in, and it's effects on Internet, on an article claiming Glenn beck was lying about "Net Neutrality".

~A fourth comment was in response to a blatantly racist comment made by a black poster on the above mentioned article about Obama's SCOTUS nomination. The comment was something along the lines of : "As long as there's no old white men on the court..." My response to the comment?: "Hmmm, racist much? Epic Racial Irony FAIL".

I am obliged to believe that this is not a technical issue, although I am waiting for a response to the inquiry I sent on the matter (Five days later).

In their Terms of Use, mediamatters.org explicitly states:

"We are committed to providing a forum where anyone, from anywhere on the political spectrum, can address and respond to the work we do."

From the comments I observed on several of their articles, they simply do not practice what is stated in the above opening to their Terms of Use. I couldn't find a single opposing viewpoint on any article I viewed.

(Update: So, after a few respectful emails, that no one at media matters had the balls to reply to, and a few more attempts to get a non-trolling comment through, I was wholly unsuccessful.

Well, not wholly. I did manage to get one comment through:
"Glenn Beck had to apologize for claiming Van Jones Was a felon, which he is not."

Yep, that's it, (It was posted to their website within hours). Now, of course this is not a surprise to anyone who's ever had to deal, in any way, with the far left propaganda machine. However, it illustrates a point that I think should be noted.

Namely, the amount of time, effort, manpower, and money the left puts into information manipulation. There are thousands and thousands of right-wing blogs and websites that are run with little, if any cost. Media Matters has an entire full time staff, just to mess around with this one website. And for what? So they can keep an alternative viewpoint of the Interwebs?

More importantly, to what purpose does that serve if the alternative viewpoint is widely acknowledged and believed by the target populace anyways?

Almost 2,500 times, (Myself not included) people have viewed the information I have posted here. Grand total cost to me? $0.00. And that's just me, on this one sorry little corner rant, with no staff, no help from friends of Obama, no $$$$. Just the information I can find in my spare time. And that's really the point of this entire exercise.

History may be written by the victors, but the victors can only claim the world is flat for so long before people start to say, "Uh, what?". Propaganda machines like Media Matters can get away with it for awhile, and there will always be a small group who agrees no matter what they say, but eventually they will be propagandizing that small group which wants to be propagandized anyways.

Congratulations Media Matters! You win! What's the prize? A bunch of intellectually lobotomized sycophants! Good luck with that. ~Philo)


  1. Ok, how about the double facepalm then? (when one facefalm doesn't cut it):


    Just kidding, you're providing a valuable service here, Philo. The good guys need information propaganda for their troops too. Just think of yourself as the anti-Alinsky, like Glenn Beck is the anti-Oprah.

  2. The anti-Alinsky! I like that. I wouldn't even have bothered with this, but I have never come across such a blatant bit of censorship and insanity anywhere on the Interwebs.
    Even on FOX news and FOX nation, you'll see folks from both sides slugging it out. And to think that this isn't just some random blogger acting like a douche bag. It's a big org. with lots of money behind it, political connections, etc.
    Scary stuff really.
    Just when you think they couldn't get any more fascist, you find out you're wrong...

    BTW, they never did have the balls to respond. I think I'll send a link to this story through their comment filters :)