I have not bothered with this story from mainstream media. If anyone beats the Guardian at their game it's CNN
Guardian deletes 45% of comments BTL to control its Syria agenda
22
August, 2016
The
Guardian wasted no time in further exploiting the al
Nusra promotional vid it
already splurged on its front pages without bothering to check the
source. Hardly was it uploaded to the servers before the Graun was
using it as a platform to promote – yet again – the (current)
official western narrative on Syria, viz that it’s all about Assad
and his Russian allies brutalising civilians and some lovely
vaguely-defined “rebels”, and if only they could be made to stop
everything would be fine.
We
have to say “current” narrative because it changes, frequently.
Yes, Assad was indeed previously the premier bad guy du
jour,
but after the failure to get approval for airstrikes against him, the
official narrative started saying ISIS was the problem and no.1
threat to western civilisation, remember? And that remained the line
until Russia intervened and started bombing ISIS, which unexpectedly
blew that official narrative to bits. Now we have version three, or a
reboot of version two. Now suddenly and inexplicably, ISIS has gone
from threatening the world with its multi-billion dollar oil and
artefact empire to being a sort of barely-acknowledged bit-player
whose precise whereabouts are never defined, except that they are
never ever located
were Russia is bombing – which is always where the “moderates”
are. Now, once again the problem is Assad, but mostly it’s Russia,
because since they’ve been there they have done literally nothing
but bomb hospitals. Because, you see, they are movie bad guys who are
evil purely for the sake of it, and we in the west are heroes who
have to somehow foil them.
This
narrative has never really got much traction, mostly because it’s
stupid, and right now it’s not going over at all. The latest
serving of it,”The
Guardian View on Syrian civilian casualties: Omran Daqneesh – a
child of war”
was published at 7:58pm on August 18 and remained open for comments
for no more than two hours. In that time the BTL section erupted in
outrage and was shredded by the moderators. The results are
shameful. Of the 75 comments not entirely obliterated (which
happens), 34 (45%) had their content deleted. And after all that not
even all the remaining 55% were supportive of the ATL line.
The
Guardian had to delete 45% of its own readers opinions, just to
mantain a bare semblance of its agenda.
No
comment that mentioned the terrorist source of the video was allowed
to remain. Every comment that identified the media “hero” of the
hour, Mahmoud
Raslan as
a supporter of al Nusra or a friend of child-beheaders was removed.
Many others that merely pointed out the gaps and absurdities in the
narrative were likewise deleted. Here is just a sample of the
carnage, incase it’s tidied up at the source in the future.
Couldn’t
be more clear, could it? The editorial line is not reflecting the
readership any more. People see through the emotional manipulation,
the moral relativism. They know the Guardian is holding a hanky over
its eyes and making fake boo-hoo noises while shilling for the
lunatics who want to make Syria a new Libya and kill thousands of
Omrans in the process.
It
didn’t work in 2012, didn’t work in 2013 and it’s working even
less now. People don’t want war in Syria because they know even if
the Guardian doesn’t, what that would mean for the people of the
region and for people everywhere.
See also this. The "journalist" is outed as An ISIS sympathiser
See also this. The "journalist" is outed as An ISIS sympathiser
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.