Press TV and antisemitism

more .....

REALIST
Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:37:29 GMT
EVERY PARASITE ISRAHELLI KILLED, IT WOULD BRING JOY AND HAPPYNESS TO THE WORLD!! ONE LESS PARASITE!!

Jason
Tue, 24 Nov 2009 16:58:37 GMT
@Ayatollah Madman, Because i am Pro-Palestinian i am Nazi Scum? Actually I am Nazi Scum because I want all Jews dead. Not because i am Pro-Palestinian, you inbred fool.

These are comments made by members of the public, the news organisation has no obligation to moderate such comments, just as the JC has no obligation to remove anti-muslim sentiments from its own boards.

Anyway, the people who are commenting in this case seem to be not even capable of basic spelling. Is it really something to get worked up over? Let them vent their furies anonymously over the net, its better that way than they do it on the street.

News organisations have *every* obligation to moderate the comments on their sites.

Why should the content of their sites be any less subject to editorial standards than the content of their TV or newspaper?

http://www.zionismontheweb.org/CommentIsFree_ParliamentASCttee_July08.pd...

I'm with DLeigh-Ellis on this. If they can't even spell, why get worked up over it? And what do you expect, it's Press TV, not Arutz 7 or the Jerusalem Post (where you'll find plenty of anti-Muslim, anti-Arab and anti-Iranian sentiments in the talkbacks)?

As usual you don't get it.

All media have moral and legal responsibilities, that is why there is OFCOM, the Press Complaints Commission and the Public Order Act.

I have to say I agree with DLeigh-Ellis and iainlrabbak. It's far better for extremist and hateful comments to be out in the open and visible to all. This shows the world the level of irrational hatred and stupidity that Israel (and the Jewish community elsewhere) is up against. Any half intelligent person will look at those comments and emotionally distance themselves from the sentiment.

Provided the articles themselves do not echo such feelings I don't have a problem with it. Anti-Semitism is real, it exists, it's dangerous, and it's far better for it to be exposed to the light of day.

Also, moderation is a double-edged sword. It can be used to censor hateful and incendiary comments, which may or may not be a good thing (debatable - see above) but it can also be used to censor rational debate if the moderator does not agree with the poster's POV. I'd be in favour of removing all forms of moderation from comments sections on news articles provided offensive posts can be somehow flagged.

You notice, Mr Hoffman, that OFCOM, the PCC and the Public Order Act are English and therefore have no jurisdiction over Tehran-based Press TV or Jerusalem-based Jerusalem Post or the Bet El-based Arutz 7.

It takes something to make the comment moderators at Comment is Free look like a model of taste and decency. That something is Press TV.

These are bad, but actually, if you follow CiFWatch's monitoring of the comments on Comment is Free and take a look at the one's they catch before the CiF moderators remove them, it looks like there's quite a bit of cross-pollination between CiF and PressTv.

The ghastly British-Israeli Seth Freedman has proudly noted that he has been interviewed on PressTV, and has had his CiF articles republished there, for example.

http://cifwatch.com/2009/09/23/while-the-cats-away-the-holocaust-deniers...

AKUS

Quite. Is the Guardian so different from PressTV when it comes to failure to moderate properly?

Others

You are being illogical. The fact is that newspapers and other media have a legal obligation not to incite hate. Their blogs shoudl be no different.

Rabbak

As usual you don't get it. PressTV transmits in the UK, it has a London office, and it is therefore subject to OFCOM and UK jurisdiction. OFCOM has found against it on at least one occasion.

Hoffman and AKUS, you hardly expect anyone to take seriously the musings of the Orwellian "watch" sites, do you? Oh and Hoffman, according to your illogic, the Jerusalem Post online and Arutz 7 should be subject to OFCOM etc jurisdiction. Goose, sauce, etc.

In al rabbak - so you cross post on CiF and the JC?

Actually, CiFWatch is being taken pretty seriously across the blogsphere and various mainstream newspapers, as you can check using that useful tool - "Google"

More interstingly is that Matt Seaton of CiF is apparently a regular reader:

http://cifwatch.com/2009/11/23/foot-in-mouth-disease-at-comment-is-free/

SantaMoniker, .... But you and that ‘other place’ have got it entirely upside and back to front, I’m afraid.

The only people who take Orwellian "watch" sites seriously are those who vent their spleen on them.

[In Tehran] they have not got round to moderating
them. It’s incompetence more than anything.” Mr Salih said he would be contacting the site moderators to ask for the comments to be removed.

Yes Indeed.

If I wrote on their site that the monkey man is going to hell, I wonder how long it would last

However, the various comments on CIF referenced on http://cifwatch.com/2009/10/21/shit-the-guardian-is-burning/ , give a similar flavor

I tried to submit this comment on their site and was infomed "you comment is not valid"

See for yourselves:

"Iran has its own problems. Pity the Iranian people - they are subject to the most barbaric laws, and except for a few, who have a limited life expectancy, don’t dare complain How many Iranians are executed on a monthly basis, how many Iranian girls are stoned to death. And it gets worse.

The fact that no one seems to care is absolutely tragic.

Look at this:

http://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/ir_un2005a.pdf.

(Page 4) The Death Penalty

Executions of minors: A child becomes criminally liable under the Islamic Penal Law, at nine years old for girls and at 15 years old for boys (Article 49 of the Islamic Penal Law). Accordingly, a girl of 9 years old may be sentenced to death. Whenever a boy or a girl who has not reached the age of liability commits a crime, the court is entitled to sentence him/her to corporal punishment."

Why isn't their outrage from those in the West.
Of course, the high priests of Political Correctness would call on "cultural sensitivity."

Addendum: the link I provided was from

The International Federation of the Rights of Man presented at the UN General Assembly, Third Committee, 60th session,October 2005
http://www.fidh.org/IMG/pdf/ir_un2005a.pdf.

Iranian intellectuals and dissidents, who incidentally also recognise the right of Israel to exist, have repeatedly submitted petitions to the UN that Iran be expelled from the UN until human rights abuses in their country are removed. They have a site: Free Iran.