« yo ho ho | Main | primal has been purged »


For those who wondered why there was nothing about the suicide bombing in Israel this week on (spefically the NYC) Indymedia, it's because the moderators of Indymedia pulled any such posts down.

Here is where all the hidden posts go.

To their credit, the moderators also hid some posts by anti-semite Latuff, and with good reason. However, I can not see their reasoning in pulling a post that just announced the news of the bus bomb attack.

They also think it's ok to post pictures of dying and injured children in Iraq so they can blame our soldiers, but it's not ok to post pictures of injured Israeli children. Why? Out of fear that it might make their pro-terrorism sentiments less palatable?

I don't know if this is just specific for the NYC Indymedia, or if it happens at the other sites, but I was under the impression that Indymedia stood for free speech, free press, the right to speak out and print the news stories and opinion you wanted to without any capitalist pig editor hanging a red marker over your head. Or something like that.

Yet the NYC Indymedia hides posts on a daily basis, and not all of them are pro-Israel or pro-Bush; some of them are decidedly leftists posts. I'm just curious as to why this organization that so cries at every turn how our freedoms have been diminished since 9/11 and screams They ar stifling my dissent! at every turn is so knee-jerk and free-wheeling with their own editing policies.



Listed below are links to weblogs that reference indymedia:

» Indy Media: unfair. Unbalanced from Israpundit
Indy Media and the Hidden Posts: anti-Israel asses and they to pretend mainstream media sucks and that they have a handle on objectivity and The Truth!... [Read More]

» Help! Help! I'm Being Repressed! from .:/One Little Victory\:.
Michele at A Small Victory (no relation) finds this litle nugget about post hiding by Indymedia editors. Yep, free speech, speak your mind -- except when they think you shouldn't. Michele's always got good stuff, I can't believe I haven't... [Read More]

» Beneath the Underground from Evil pundit of doom!
This warren of hidden posts has become a community of dissent within the dissenting, the Underground's own Underground. [Read More]

» Indymedia Censorship Policy from Third Superpower
I don’t know if this is just specific for the NYC Indymedia, or if it happens at the other sites,... [Read More]

» Barking Moonbat Website of Next Week from blogoSFERICS
Although its moonbat status will come as no surprise to many, the fact that Indymedia has seen fit to call... [Read More]


Apparently in their tagline, "Community-based" means "them what got passwords".

How the hell did you find that?

All Indymedia outlets "hide" posts. Their (ahem) volunteer editors pick and choose what is worthy of being seen, and what you have to search for.

Amazingly enough, most posts that do not fit their worldview get hidden.

Free speech? Do as I say, not as I do.

"I was under the impression that Indymedia stood for free speech"

Where did you get a dumbass idea like that?

I was under the impression that the Party stood for the equality of all peoples, until I saw the dachas of the Party leaders.

This is nothing new for the left. One need only refer to George Orwell, who railed against the left press coverage of the Spanish Civil War.

Because the English Left press in those days so solidly sided with Stalinist Russia, only those stories which favorably portrayed the factions backed by Stalin were allowed to see the light of day. Stories sympathetic to Anarchists and Trade Unionists were quietly killed at first, then later condemned as "Trotskyist" because they were actually to the left of the Soviet Union.

Later Orwell articulated one of the central critiques of Marxist ideology; that is, that it can explain anything yet it can predict nothing and can problem-solve even less. If you were an apologist for Stalin, this inborn trait took the form of censoring uncomfortable facts, such as massive industrial or agricultural failures.

I have run across much censorship on SF Indymedia, and have seen others complain about it. There's nothing "indy" about them, just like there's nothing particularly "progressive" about so-called "progressives".

I do find it curious that even though these posts have been hidden. People can still read them by searching for hidden posts.

Is this incompetent censorship? Or creating a form of editing that could be argued isn't consorship because the articles are still available.

michelle, no offense, but it is INCREDIBLY naive of you to think that IndyMedia "stood for free speech, free press, the right to speak out and print the news stories and opinion you wanted to..." Ho boy...

If anything, the record is plain that they surpress speech and have a decidedly anti-American agenda. I suggest heading over to Llittle Green Footballs and searching for "IndyMedia" to see the numerous (and boy, do I mean numerous) reports that blogger Charles Johnson has pulled from the IndyMedia website that documents how anti-Semetic and anti-American they are. They get rid of posts that don't keep with their agenda - and a lot of posts that DO remain up there that are vicious and full of hate.

I spent some time reading and posting at Santa Cruz IndyMedia some months ago, and found them no more tolerant than their colleagues in SF or NYC of a true diversity of opinion (mine was libertarian and highly critical of the revolutionary left, though not of any personally identified member of the local leftist establishment). They identify themselves as an "open publishing forum," but in the time I was attempting to be a contributor there, the gatekeepers there seemed quick to consign to the "hidden" morgue any articles or comments that did not mesh with a leftist worldview (except for the occasional extreme right-wing screed, which was apparently left visible as an an illustration of conservative ridiculousness, and which also served as a magnet for leftist/progressive "rebuttal").

Recently, the Santa Cruz IndyMedia reworked and published their editorial policy. The new version was, in fact, lifted from the NYC IndyMedia policy (including the use of the awful phrase "we have consensed" instead of "we have reached consensus"). So, while it is certainly correct to call IndyMedia "alternative media," it is probably not correct to say they are truly "independent media," or that they offer true "open publishing forums."

Thus is it ever with the "left." Very few of them are honest.

What's surprising is that you were surprised. When has the Left had power and not censored unpleasant points of view?

I rather suspect that Michelle's suprise was remarkably similar to Captain Loius Renault's being shocked shocked! to discover that gambling had been happening at Rick's...

I am not naive enough to believe that Indymedia stood for any of those things. That was subtle sarcasm.

The editors and readers of Indymedia, however, probably believe all that to be true.

This is standard for Indymedia.org. They've yet to post anything on the Iran pro-democracy movement. It's really quite irritating. It's not Indymedia, it's Ourpersonalaxetogrindmedia.

I'm not a regular reader here (I'm here via Instantpudding), but even I could pick up on the sarcasm on display.

Indymedia is just plain creepy.

The reason why they would never post anything about the pro-democracy movement in Iran is because the last thing that the Fascist Left cares about is democracy. Currently the Fascist Left sees its primary goal the overthrow of Capitalism and America, and they would even ally with the evil jihads to do it.

Indymedia? Ha. More like FarLeftyMedia.

The 5 or 10% of knowledgeable lefties, who understand the nihilism, moral and political bankruptcy of their cause, absolutely cannot let the truth leak out. Otherwise, they will lose their followers, and bankroll, and what power they have.

I have a couple friends who are recovering anti-globalist left wing knuckleheads. After getting bombarded by me with news articles - from the mainstream press yet - they started to think for themselves, and though they aren't conservatives by any stretch, they take what they read with a grain of salt, and pretty much thoroughly disbelieve anything International ANSWER and their Stalinist fellow travelers say.

By the way, you need to read some Marcuse & Gramsci to understand what the hard left is up to with their propagandizing. The goal is to destroy the existing social fabric in order to impose a utopian social scheme; any tactic is justified by this higher end - especially any tactic that is "transgressive", i.e. destructive of traditional social order. So a convenient political lie is good not only because it helps the cause, but because it is dishonest and "transgressive", flying in the face of traditional morality. The lie is therefore destructive of the existing social order, and preferable even to a useful truth...

But don't believe me... go read some Gramsci & Marcuse.

Wow. It must be especially galling for a bunch of right-wing extremists (used to having the American system schill for their every beck and call) to be confronted with a left-wing news alternative that is actually both powerful AND popular. "A Small Victory"? Ha. I'm sure that all five people that have heard of you wish that they had 1/10th as much influence on the political scene as Indymedia.


Anyway, for your viewing pleasure, here is the official NYC-IMC newsire moderation policy. It was reached through a lot of hard work and democratic debate. Enjoy!!


The Open Publishing Newswire is an essential aspect of the Indymedia project. It was set-up to provide a globally accessible space for anyone to quickly self-publish breaking news, articles, commentary, digital photos and audio.

Indymedia NYC itself is composed of five working groups. From these five all-volunteer groups, people volunteer to moderate the newswire. Presently, moderating requires at least 3 hours a day, by any given moderator.

In the last year and a half, the NYC IMC Open Publishing Newswire has been besieged with neo-nazi postings, and other items and commentary which are far away from what the Newswire is meant to be: A vital space of progressive and radical breaking news, commentary, articles, and announcements.

There are no easy or perfect solutions to moderating an open newswire, rich with a healthy democracy of views.

We have consensed on the following guidelines to help us decide what postings are appropriate and what are not. We believe that these guidelines will help to make the moderating process a clearer one for IMC volunteers, for anyone who self-publishes, and finally an unencumbered, useful and open newswire for readers worldwide.

We especially encourage individuals to publish:

- Well researched, timely articles
- Eyewitness accounts of progressive actions and demonstrations
- Coverage of New York City metro area issues
- Media analysis
- Investigative reports exposing injustice
- Stories on events affecting underrepresented groups
- Media produced from within underrepresented groups
- Local stories with national or global significance
- Stories on people or projects working towards social and economic justice
- Original, underreported stories of local, regional, national, or global importance.

When May A Post Be Hidden?

An “open publishing” system is founded, fundamentally, on trust. The editors of and participants in this project trust that other participants will use the newswire to publish news, or, at the least, intelligent and insightful commentary. But as New York Indymedia’s popularity has grown, so has the abuse of our open publishing system. Some of the abuse seems to be juvenile in nature; some it amounts to a deliberate attempt to destroy the project. What’s more, an unsystematic and scattershot moderation policy may have confused other readers, who might not be aware of what constitutes abuse and what constitutes news.

The New York IMC editorial collective, in order to maintain the integrity of the newswire and the media commons it creates for our community of participants, may "hide" posts to the Newswire when the content disregards the guidelines that have been put in place (see below).

We’d like to remind everyone that hidden articles are not deleted from the site. All content posted to the newswire can be accessed through the administrative interface, where hidden posts can be viewed.

While we try to avoid hiding posts as much as possible, the following types of items will merit close scrutiny and may be hidden:

- Spam posting; i.e., post deliberately designed to disrupt the newswire and its basic ability to function. These are posts that are deemed to be devoid of content or analysis and appear to be published with the sole purpose of disruption. An example of this kind of post, titled “Schummer Comes Out,” can be found here.
- Posts the author has requested hidden.
- Posts which are obviously incorrect or misleading. This includes attempts to spread dis-information or to impersonate another individual. For example, a poster once posted a cartoon under the name “Latuff” when in fact it was drawn by another artist. This post can be seen here.
- Posts that contain generalized and negative assertions about any race, nation, creed, class, ethnic group, sexual orientation, etc.
- Posts that advocate the mass physical elimination of a specific race, nation, creed, class, ethnic group, sexual orientation, etc, or that link to websites that advocate the same. The following story, for example, contained a link to a neo-Nazi website and was accordingly deleted. That said, while we deeply abhor both racism and anti-Semitism, such opposition does not automatically entail the complete or partial acceptance of the national agenda of any particular state.
- Posts that treat the newswire as a personal “bulletin board” with non-political content directed at one or another newswire participants.
- Unreadable formats (i.e. photos posted as text)
- Posts titled "test."
- Duplicate posts (including duplicate photographs)
- Advertising of products or for-profit services.
- Pornography, excepting sexually explicit satire.

Within the above guidelines, we welcome posts that disagree with the opinions held by the editors of this website.


Every six months, the New York IMC collective will review this policy, as well as a sampling of posts hidden during the previous six months. We would also like to emphasize that if any collective member disagrees with the hiding of any post, he or she may contact the editorial listserve or request to discuss the matter at a General Meeting.

Contacting Us

Members of the New York Indymedia collective do their best to moderate the newswire in the manner described above. However, sometimes we miss something. We welcome our readers to contact us at imcnycmod (at) yahoo (dot) com if they have a comment our question about newswire moderation.

IMC NYC - be the media

by Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo 9:09am Thu Jul 3 '03

Also, any articles relating to the species "Ailuropoda melanoleuca" (Giant Panda), or any black-and-white bear residing in temperate bamboo forests, will be deleted.

But seriously I have a question. I understand you don't want your newswire spammed with nonsense. But how do these rules apply to the comments? For example, will you delete (or "hide") this comment?
i agree with joe
by kevin 9:48am Thu Jul 3 '03

what about comments? what about idiotic graphics (cough*Vincent*cough)? what about disgusting cartoons by the likes of Latuff? how can you access "hidden" items?
Critical Mass Flash movie
by GammaBlaBlog 10:44am Thu Jul 3 '03

Critical Mass coverage is featured on your front page, so you must consider it relevant. But on your hidden page, I notice that my first person coverage as well as photos from Lina Pallotta are "hidden."

I didn't see what Lina Pallotta posted, so I can't comment on any stricture she may have violated. But I don't understand the reason my Flash slideshow of the gathering in Unions Square needed to be put down the memory hole.
Good idea
by Caps Lock 11:05am Thu Jul 3 '03

Thanks IMC for doing this!

Glad to hear that there is some way of dealing with all the trolling and abusive chat room type nonsense.

Thanks again! The newsire is a great thing.
by birdbrain 11:12am Thu Jul 3 '03

here we go:

"- Posts that contain generalized and negative assertions about any race, NATION, creed, class, ethnic group, sexual orientation, etc."

AMERICA, the perverted, deviant, genocidal maniac is now free from 'negative assertions' concerning its corrupt foreign and domestic policies.

TPotUS is now free from attacks on his cyclopean vision and congenital brutality undertaken to advance the realization of world-domination (not to mention an endless source of poisonous ridicule: his twisted personality).

It's official: IMC is now a direct affiliate of Media Inc. (Medusa).
dear birdbrain
by bird killer 11:27am Thu Jul 3 '03

perhaps you should learn what a nation is. (here's a clue: it is not a state)
an infantile policy
by pandora's box 11:32am Thu Jul 3 '03

The increasing popularity of IMC has been precisely due to its freewheeling character. What many readers want is news presented without the dry monotone voice of the New York Times, and with a certain amount of passion. Readers themselves can pick and choose what they want to read from the wire without the need for paternalistic "Big Brother" decisionmaking. While the new policy hopefully won't totally kill off IMC, its ultimate effect will be to significantly reduce IMCs readership, and thus IMC's influence and credibility as a force for social change.
PC doesn't belong here
by r krake 11:45am Thu Jul 3 '03

Most of your guidelines are fine and are in accord with
common sense and decency and an effort to maintain NYC
Indymedia as a viable entity. But I have to say that you are treading on VERY thin ice when you stipulate:

"Posts that contain generalized and negative assertions about any race, nation, creed, class, ethnic group, sexual orientation, etc."

Recently, the vicious and murderous state of Israel threatened to boycott the BBC because they had had the temerity to report on Israel's vast and sadistic numbers
of WMDs, especially nuclear and chemical. Their excuse:
"The BBC is ANTI-SEMITIC if not NAZI-istic"

So are we at INdymedia not supposed to reveal uncomfortable
truths because they might be interpreted this way?

The problem with your statement above is that it plays into
the hands of propagandist despots. They suppress free speech on the grounds it conveys a "generalized and negative assertion" about an ethnic group.

What about Holocaust revisionists? They are an underrepresented group too! And as appalling and horrific as their claims seem, they are NOT propounding genocide, while Israel is


What are the results of 20 years of political correctness?
The biggest fascist backlash since WWII.

So as sound as most of your guidelines are, I hope that you will reconsider the one prohibiting "negative portrayals."

Thanks for posting this!
birdbrain indeed
by caps lock 11:48am Thu Jul 3 '03

it is highly doubtful that the way you are interperting that is how it will play out at IMC.

Haven't you seen all the things radically critical of the Bush Administration, etc. on IMC NYC in the center column, etc. etc. No?!
good news
by reader 12:00pm Thu Jul 3 '03

this is a huge step forward thta will increase the credibility, effectiveness and popularity of the nyc-imc web site. for every person who enjoys (or at least is willing) to sort thorugh all the troll postings, there are many others readers who become discouraged or distrustful and don't come back. also, there are many activists who won't post to the newswire because they figure their stories will get lost amidst all the spam.
by ww 12:02pm Thu Jul 3 '03

freedom, not wild 'free-wheeling'
by caps lock 12:08pm Thu Jul 3 '03

gotta say, can't really see how this policy is infantile at all. As for alienating people who come to IMC for its free-wheeling nature.. I don't know. I thought people came to IMC for its non-corporate raw, on the ground, news and articles. The trolling and all the insane posts are a problem not part of what is good about IMC. Hardly anyone really enjoys, or looks forward to going to IMC to weed thru spam posts, etc.

I for one use NYC IMC as one IMC resource in the whole network to find out about things that are not covered or are only barely covered by the "mainstream". And what is a particular relief about IMC and what is truly unique is that the articles are to-the-point, not filled with wild conspiracy theory stuff, and pretty much fact-based. The posts on the open newswire, contribute to understanding with photos, etc.


The trolling and the spams contribute pretty much nothing but a perversion of dialogue and the project and blog up what is actually unique and important about IMC.

I think that if that sort of junk is allowed to grow and it brings on more people to the site, it will also mean that the site itself will change, becoming (if you are right) a popular site that is very much a kind of site rich with rant-blog type nonsense.

'Free-wheeling' is a part of what IMC open publishing is. Can't see how hiding f&*ked up spams and heavy trolling, in any way will effect that.

Actually, I think it will make it more free.
by Matt Capri 12:09pm Thu Jul 3 '03

I am really glad you decided to moderate the newswire. It was out of hand almost from the beginning and I think it shows some real political maturity to step up and take some resposibility for it. What would the alternative be?
Porn, Nazi postings, childish "chat room" dialogues, why should I waste my time sifting through that trying to get to the news?
People should not expect this arrangement to be perfect, only better.
I'm thrilled
by the burningman 12:14pm Thu Jul 3 '03

I first encountered the IMC during the days of Seattle and it was something to behold. Millions of people were able to access information directly from the participants. There were manifestos and video feeds, interviews and tons of information. It was a goldmine.

Over time, Indymedia has grown – and spread throughout the world. It is an embryonic threat to the AP/Reuters/Fox/CNN partyline media outlets – and for that reason, some groups have actively attempted to disrupt the newswire by "publishing" endless spam, bigoted comments and "flames" – internet slang for comments meant to give more heat than light.

NYC Indymedia should be congratulated for coming to an agreement about news on the newswire. This space is a commons, that doesn't mean some jerk gets to take a dump on the lawn.


Regarding lower quality content: Some of the above comments have asked why "idiotic" posts aren't taken down. I think the answer is that it really is an open newswire. Some commentary might be poorly written or formulated. That doesn't mean it should be hidden. Free speech makes no promises.

For those who think the "freewheeling" character of the site will be compromised – I encourage you to waste your own time trolling throught the hidden posts. Anyone who goes there will quickly grasp the endless amount of agressive, hateful and useless garbage. There is nothing "free" about coming to this site and having to read anti-Semetic posts one after the other. There is nothing "free" about disruption campaigns by organized rightwing groups such as the Free Republic and zionist bloggers.

Will this cost "readers?" I don't think so at all. And if Indymedia loses participants who are bent on promoting race hatred and disinformation, I'm not shedding any tears. I think the truth is exactly the opposite. I've spoken with MANY people over the last couple of years who thought Indymedia was unreliable, contained attacks on their ethnicity and didn't take it seriously. Good information and strong, healthy debate will attract participants.

I am so happy. This project is getting better all the time.
one comment
by #3 1:07pm Thu Jul 3 '03

sounds great...

one comment>>

don't really get what is meant by "Posts that contain generalized and negative assertions about any race, nation, creed, class, ethnic group, sexual orientation, etc."

does this mean I can't say that the USA is ON THE WHOLE a capitalist, consumerist, war machine of a country which brings misery to its own people???

Would it be preferred to say that: "Certain citizens of the United States experience what some have sighted as a troubling level of misery and high stress, due in part, to what some experts have seen as high physical and psychological toll. Increasingly it is found that such events as state executions and un-founded wars on other people's have a detrimental effect on many citizens. Furthermore, due to the competitive nature of the work-place, coupled with rising costs, less time outside of work, and a breakdown in the structures of support in the social fabric detrminental effects on the level of happiness and satisfaction experienced by people is seen"


I would hate to see the fire of expressing things right to the point, become absent refined by a bueracratic (and largely 'mainstream' driven) idea of how you should say things...


Please clarify what is meant on this one thing.

-- #3
regarding #3
by imc-er 1:23pm Thu Jul 3 '03

a few people have expressed a fear that the bit about generalized negative comments about a nation means that we can't criticize the United States. My understanding, though, is that when we say "nation" we mean it in the classic sociological sense of the term; i.e., a tribe or a group. We DON'T mean a state or country.

For example, there's a difference between saying "the country of India has an anti-Muslim policy in the province of Gujarat" and saying "all Indians hate Muslims."

Basically, #3 means: don't be a ranting racist, sexist, classist, etc.
I think...
by the burningman 1:30pm Thu Jul 3 '03

An example would be "Americans are evil." Or more likely "Zionazis control Congress" or "Arabs don't love their children" or "black people should stop whining" or "Jewish bloodlust" and so on. This isn't so gray. There is a tremendous amount of crazed and racist garbage posted up by crazed and racist kooks.

Criticizing the actions of governments, political parties, and nations isn't the same as dehumanizing the people they claim to represent. We can oppose Hitler without hating "Huns." We can deal with the horrible injustice being done to the Palestinians without tolerating anti-Jewish trash. We can denounce religious fundamentalism without degrading people of faith.

I don't think there is a simple answer to this problem, but check the hidden posts if you want some idea of what is being taken down.
by Cargo Cult 1:39pm Thu Jul 3 '03

What about comments to posted "news" items? Will they be moderated as well?
what about
by Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo 2:05pm Thu Jul 3 '03

What about banning people (blocking IP's)? And don't tell me you don't do that, cause you do.
by imcista 2:16pm Thu Jul 3 '03

I don't think we can block IPs. But, if we could and had to deal with disruptive trolls - I'd be all for it.

I wish you would just stick to being funny and avoid all the spam you post. I don't know why you waste the weather with that kind of shit – it's beautiful outside.

Anyway, cheers to the new policy. Everyone agreed at the IMC – something had to be done. We'll see how it goes.
by Bill 2:44pm Thu Jul 3 '03

The Policy does not begin, "I am the Lord thy God, ..."; nor does it end, "Ioannes Paulus PP. II".

Indeed, it several times, eg "Members of the New York Indymedia collective do their best" suggests that a number of normal human beings are involved, neither cloned nor properly brainwashed.

It seems likely that the moderators are a bunch of disparate folks, with different ideas about the meanings of words, and different ideas about what are acceptable posts and comments.

As any human endeavour, the only way to discover the rules is to watch and remember what actually happens.

Attempting to split boundary hairs is either foolish or trollish.
out of the memory hole
by GammaBlaBlog 2:49pm Thu Jul 3 '03

The "Critical Mass Flash Movie" post has been restored.
I was emailed this apology/explanation.
"It was either a mistake on the part of a moderator, or a code error. Your post is back up. imc-nyc "
published with the sole purpose of disruption
by siku 2:50pm Thu Jul 3 '03

moderation, moderation

if disruption was not our goal,
if straight sense and preformatted styles were, would it still be open publishing?

it wasnt indypendent, but dependent on independency.
i propose you the same as www.indymedia.ch (Switzerland) did;
Create a trash bin for inadequate posts. Thats the word, lots of ppl love: adequacy. Bill Clinton e.t.c (i_know..)
The USA were always admired for their freedoms, what now with this stiffness? always follow the rules, ah yeah.
But sometimes defiance is adequate a means to criticize stuff.
This Schrummer, why do you pretend this post is spam.
caus you dont like it, or because you hate the idea of a picture being stronger than clumsily tipped Letters?
hes probably worth it, (see all the responses)
good luck guys, now you finally get to know the fuss about it, "to control information".
Its power, pure power, good luck guys. I`ll be waiting on the other side of the wall. SIck-01
by son of sade 3:30pm Thu Jul 3 '03

all is power. pure power.

However, these guidlines, seem like a way of doing something 'impurely' in fact.

Not something pure (i hope -- though the puritan streak is a thing that americans as rule have to stretch their limbs a bit out of that mess time after time). difficult. and thorny.

Go for it!

- son of sade
Okay, Goodbye
by Vince 3:36pm Thu Jul 3 '03

Not lost on me there is nothing about graphics here:

- Well researched, timely articles
- Eyewitness accounts of progressive actions and demonstrations
- Coverage of New York City metro area issues
- Media analysis
- Investigative reports exposing injustice
- Stories on events affecting underrepresented groups
- Media produced from within underrepresented groups
- Local stories with national or global significance
- Stories on people or projects working towards social and economic justice
- Original, underreported stories of local, regional, national, or global importance.
by g 4:09pm Thu Jul 3 '03


i don't think there is any special anti-graphics thing going on....

encouraged just means that, it doesn't mean to bar everything which is strictly not noted as 'encouraged' .

did you see the adbusters post today? or the weapons of mass destruction thing.. not exactly, strictly speaking, perfect fits to what is listed as "endorsed".

- g
i didnt want to advertise purity
by siku 4:17pm Thu Jul 3 '03

whithe space
white space

and who knows their news?
about information power and indention, also visit my art piece of Slideshow at http://www.slidebay.ch.vu
Help rendering the image of us to somewhat colaborative, will ya?
KEEP IT UP New York, New York q=11 y=1456 z=11264 o=18
if there is a radical change from growth fascism and private indoctrination to global sustainability and social justice, it will come from America. Go for it, now!

see you
by Anonymous 6:29pm Thu Jul 3 '03

Everywhere in the world and every time, when IM began some "moderate policy" it moderates nothing but critics against the Israelian Likudnik policy (naming this critics "antisemitics")and it fights against the solidarity with the rights of the Palestinian People .
I know the europeans I.M. and for this reason usuallly I read English and Americans I.M .
This time is gone . A new Big Brother is born .
do you hear the death rattle of the trolls?
by Emmanuel Goldstein 6:51pm Thu Jul 3 '03

I am happy this policy came into being so that moderation will be consistent and transparent. The on-again off-again ways of yesterday made the site really unreliable.

I am happy to see a wide range of opinions and I, for one, won't stop my comments. I am a critic of zionism, but so much anti-Jewish stuff made it funky. Thanks for saying that bigotries of ANY kind won't be tolerated.

An anti-zionist Jew.
by dnice 8:31pm Thu Jul 3 '03

good work! i hope more people step up and help moderate.

whitewash 2
by birdbrain 2 11:13pm Thu Jul 3 '03

i never had a problem sorting through the bigoted and racist posts, nor all the 'trash' or 'undesirables,' without your help before, and i certainly don't need it now. this is condescending hypocrisy, you're creating an new 'underclass' of people whose opinions and ignorance is unequal to your own. everyone's opinion is ignorant to some degree, you are attempting to raise your own to a level of 'legitimacy' while looking down your noses at others, imitating the very thing you suposedly oppose.
"Hidden" items
by Mark Bialkowski 11:44pm Thu Jul 3 '03

Keep in mind, while perusing the hidden articles page, that multimedia items added to an article will be marked hidden by default, but will be accessible through their parent article.
ignorance is bliss
by mn 12:46am Fri Jul 4 '03

thing is birdbrain, a lot of people DID have a problem with the neo-nazi spamming, trolling etc.

not about being above it all. just about putting into words some ideas of how to moderate.

btw, posts are moderated by IMC sites all the time, including this one. I believe that things have been moderated for quite some time at IMC NYC. This is just a way of shaping that process up and developing ideas of how to do it -- So, I guess your commentary ain't getting pushed off the newswire?! What are you afraid of? -- Do you seriously defend trolling and neo-nazi spams, as merely misguided but equal among all other utterances type of thing.. ?? I like to get all existential about things too, but this is a little like refusing to make distinctions on some mistaken principle that you are protecting the right to be unique, or something.

Being unique doesn't have to involve spewing racism does it?

Or rather we don't have to put up with that as a measure of our committment to humanity do we?

- mn
thin ice
by ry 1:00am Fri Jul 4 '03

i would like to post my agreement with comments made by r krake (11:48am july 03) on the issue of mediation of the newswire.

i think that any subjective moderation (aside that which is done by the individual for his/herself) in the name of an objective guideline or set of principles no matter how well meaning is a threat to the liberation of information and in effect the realization of a more free society.

i know i dont need anyone to filter anything from my eyes ever, i am free and abled to descide what has validity or not for myself. if there are opinions posted on this website that are offensive so fucking what!, these opinions exsist in our world and right here in our own communities, ignoring it and saving our eyes from their racist banter is not solving a damn thing.

there are ways to do this right and i am sure that everyone at NYC IMC has the best of intentions but i disagree with the censorship.

why not have two columns of the newswire, one mediated, one not, let the people descide for themselves which they want to read from. i understand that this is why you are not deleting and instead hiding.
ok its late thats all i can come up with right now.
What about these guys?
by Joe 4:16am Fri Jul 4 '03

Jesus Justices, let it go

Remember you can Just say No

Fucking Ass Can Be Quite Fun

Once You Start, You’re Never Done.

It’s just a simple choice, and legitimate too

You won’t give a damn if it’s just not for you

But shrill objections seem to say

The fear runs deep, who’s straight; who’s gay

Privacy means something,
With a woman or a man

In your choice of porno movies
Or a pubic on your can

Deep in the Hole of Texas
Or now is it really Bumfuck?

You can sodomize your neighbor
In your bedroom, or your dump truck!
What About Bob?
by Harry Bowman 1:53pm Fri Jul 4 '03

As a frequent poster to Ithaca IMC who lives in his
neighborhood, I would like to ask how this policy would
affect Ithaca citizen Robert Meade Israel "Deaf Messenger".
Lots of IMCs have tried to ban his posts, which actually
have quite a bit of literary merit, as either "spam",
which is nonsense, as Bobby does not sell anything, or
as antisemitism, which is nonsense because NAZIs (Niggardly
Assinine Zionist Idiots) can be clearly seen in the
context of his posts to be a small ruling group of persons
which is racially and sexually integrated.

Does NYC plan to become one of the disturbingly long list
of IMCs that has said there is no free speech for Bobby?
by watching the watchers 3:31pm Fri Jul 4 '03

"An example would be "Americans are evil." Or more likely "Zionazis control Congress".


Zionazis are not an ethnic group. Nor a nation. They are adherents and practitioners of a fascist ideology that has the contempt of progressive people the whole world over.

Suppressing "zionazi" may betray a hidden agenda.
by Feral Sage 3:45pm Fri Jul 4 '03

To NYC-IMC: Your policy is well thought out and goes a long way toward addressing the needs of the average Indymedia reader for a balanced, intelligent source of news and analysis.

There will, unfortunately, be those among us who are not yet able to make the distinction between "negative assertion" and "critical comment" (as, for example, in the case of Israel). Let us hope that the mental discipline that accompanies a careful reading of well-researched, well-written articles will ultimately benefit those who feel their minds must be so "open" that their brains fall out. Surely if they feel that "balance" and "freedom of the press" are achieved by the inclusion of racist/sexist/homophobic screeds and the broadbrushing of entire ethnic populations, they can easily surf on over to one of the many websites that pander to those tastes and viewpoints.

The control exerted over content in accordance with the new policy reflects the expectations of those who want factual, timely, informational content -- which is precisely why Indymedia was created.

Again, thanks NYC-IMC. I'm sure my thoughts on this matter are shared by many others who have better things to do than sift through endless crap posts in order to get to the useful info.
o, the drama
by g 4:41pm Fri Jul 4 '03

some folks are waxing heavy with violin chord laments and sorrowful waves as they sling their bags over their shoulders and mournfully, sometimes angrily recede away from this space...

You can almost see an old man, perhaps in a hooded robe, walk forward, the light slowly rising, say in a gravely yet direct-to-the-bone voice: 'upon this day IMC lost its way.. falling into the cracks of time, falling into the recesses of the Control, of the Mind-Police'


The thing is, it's really not all that momentous an occassion. It makes exciting drama to make it more then it is.. but it is just that: drama.

This is just a set of guidelines... not the end>>> kind of not that exciting.

Moderating is pretty standard with IMC newswires. Or at least it ain't exactly from outer space.

- g
by Orwell's Ghost 7:00pm Fri Jul 4 '03

Some are more equal than others
deaf messenger?
by Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo 8:33pm Fri Jul 4 '03

Is that Half Track Man? Mr Babylonicide?
i support this decision
by mike 11:31am Sat Jul 5 '03

So many times I have said to a friend of mine who works (on and off) at NYC Indymedia, the open publishing thing is a serious drag. You have to wade through porn, hateful commentary etc etc etc, why oh why don't you just have some kind of filter??

I read stuff on this website for the exact reasons you stated:Well researched, timely articles
- Eyewitness accounts of progressive actions and demonstrations
- Coverage of New York City metro area issues
- Media analysis
- Investigative reports exposing injustice
- Stories on events affecting underrepresented groups
- Media produced from within underrepresented groups
- Local stories with national or global significance
- Stories on people or projects working towards social and economic justice
- Original, underreported stories of local, regional, national, or global importance.

I think this is a step in the right direction. Surely this was a difficult decision.

Can you really do it?
by Ashkan 3:07pm Sat Jul 5 '03

I want to applaud the decision and I think it's a good thing that offensive language won't be spread here anymore. I say this as a very active member of a Palestinian rights group on my campus in Missouri. I come to the NYC IMC b/c the city is active on the issue--it seems to me to be b/c of the high Jewish population--and I want to see what kind of dialogue is going on and how pro-zionist reactionaries respond. I have often been disappointed by the comments which attack Jews in general and seem to accept Israel's claims to representing all Jews. I'm not surprised by how offensive pro-Zionist people get but when people claiming to want justice respond similarly, I always wonder if they are not in fact working together to stall the dialogue. But my question for IMC is if you will have the courage to stand up to charges of anti-Semitism yourselves when you refuse to publish anti-Palestinian hate dialogue. Will you allow people to preach for the sort of ethnic cleansing (expulsion) supported by nearly half the Israeli public and a majority of America's so-called "friends of Israel"? This speech is perfectly acceptable in the Israeli press and even Sharon's government.
So I'm just worried that there is a great deal of anti-Semitism against both Jews and against Palestinians in these pages but Rudy Giulianni and Abe Foxman are only holding conferences for Jewish Semites (2% of all the Semitic peoples I believe).
Will IMC allow "ender" to place posts explaining very eloquently and diplomatically and in all seriousness how Palestinians love their own children less than all other human beings do? What if she wants to quote highly-respected Israeli PMs and American Organization Presidents saying essentially the same thing? Will I continue to see denials of the most established human rights in respect to the Palestinians posted on these pages?
I'm just saying that it sounds good in principle but you may be biting off a lot more than you can chew. Thank you.
PS What if someone want to post the script of Numbers 33:52-56? It's very offensive but a billion Christians and Jews take it as God's commandment. How will you deal with that?
hey Ashkan!!!
by Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo 4:22pm Sat Jul 5 '03

Hey Ashkan, I have some Bible verses for you.

Leviticus 18:23

Leviticus 20:15

Exodus 22:19

Deuteronomy 27:21

Look them up, you might learn something important about your behavior
slippery slope
by madhatter 5:00pm Sat Jul 5 '03

this goes both ways. the int'l site switched to local reporting features from imc's around the world to prevent spam.

at the danbury, ct imc, we have 2 newswires, one that's local/state and the other is the int'l one which gives twice the insight. we rarely get spam, maybe once a week if, but to tell the truth, that's what makes it TRULY DIVERSE. i hate the spammers, but it adds a whole new dimension, a voice for the right-wingers.

open publishing is a blessing for fascists. they don't have a soapbox and we have indirectly provided one for them.

i see the nyc imc's point and there really is no way to curb bullshit.

i do have a problem with "banning" anything. the word ban is not only a deoderant but slippery slopes in our world.

let's see how this trial period lasts.
Thank you burningman!
by krake 5:49pm Sat Jul 5 '03

Burningman posted the comment that proved my point? He/she said that posts stating "Zionazis control Congress" should be censored beacause they 'discriminate against an ethnic group'!!

Exactement! That's precisely the disaster I predicted.

Anti-Zionism will be censored in the name of anti-Semitism.

And the truth -- that Zionazis do indeed control Congress --will be banished to the dustbin.

Just like Faux News! Whoopee!

(all it takes is one uninformed NYC-IMC intern reviewing and sorting the posts to start the long slippery slide toward censorship and mind control).

As I said before, most of the guidelines are senseible, but when you start deciding what is and what isn't offensive to
an ethnic group, you've lost your independence and your grip on reality. Not to mention your sense of humor....

You can't even allow humor if you're going to be this careful. Would "All in the Family" ever have survived under
guidelines such as these? What would happen to Chris Rock's standup? And so forth...

Yes -- some graphics would be outlawed. No doubt about it.

So what will happen is that someone will send in an article stating that Zionazis control Congress or the mainstream media or the Bush admin. And a well-meaning censor will remove the "offensive" post, thinking it is anti-Semitic.

Uncomfortable truths, humor -- and art -- will DIE under these constraints.

In Re to the filter: stop the hate speech -- but don't prescribe "acceptable" thinking.
like death
by hardee harhar 8:50pm Sat Jul 5 '03

'difficult decision' 'trial period'

"Nobody likes war. Attacking Iraq was a 'difficult decision.'"

"Nobody likes war. Attacking [insert victim here] was a 'difficult decision.'"

"Income tax will be a temporary measure. It was a 'difficult decision.' We'll re-evaluate after a 'trial period.'"

"In the interest of National Security we must impose Martial Law and temporarily suspend constiutional rights and guarantees. It was a 'difficult decision.' We'll re-evaluate after a 'trial period.'"

Criticisms about the hidden post policy are a frequent topic on the discussion boards at Indymedia. This itself at least suggests a modicum of open-mindedness. Better than can be said for most newswires/blogs I have seen.

This so-called Left/Right ideological split that so many use to identify their friends and foes is inaccuarate and out-moded. If I am anti-gun-control does it require me to bend over every time a Republican walks into the room? Likewise, if I criticize US foreign policy does that automatically make me a Stalin worshipping vegetarian? Let's focus on the issues and leave the identity politics to the wackos.

Heavens to betsy! Thank god that sort of thing never happens at, say, Free Republic!


I posted your post and a link to it several times troughout the day to sf.indymedia.org, the most notorious for censorship of the indymedia group, and they were all deleted fast.

Censorship is an ongoing debate there - when they don't delete the debates.

Actually its all an environmental movement - they are self-parodying to save energy.

Only a complete idiot would believe that these doubleplusgood rules behind Indy's editorial policy are in any way objective. They're a verbose rationalization for decisions already made about what will be posted (decisions straight from the temper-tantrum, pollyanna muddle sloshing in left-wing "brains") .

These remind me of the rules written on the barn wall in Orwell's "Animal Farm": utterly vapid.

"- Well researched (However that's defined or measured.), timely articles
- Eyewitness accounts of progressive (Whatever that means.) actions and demonstrations
- Coverage of New York City metro area issues
- Media analysis (This by folks who have yet to analyze why almost every left-wing media prediction -- and even "account" -- of the Iraq war was wrong.)
- Investigative reports exposing injustice (I'm still not sure what the left means by "injustice," but they like this word a lot. I've noticed that it's often based on certain conspiracy theories about the court system and misunderstandings of market economics.)
- Stories on events affecting underrepresented groups (I'd love to be a fly on the wall when this term is discussed. My guess is that minority groups represented in the media in proportion to their actual occurence in the population are considered "underrepresented," especially if they're brown.)
- Media produced from within underrepresented groups (i.e., if you're a Black lesbian, any crap you write will be published.)
- Local stories with national or global significance (What makes something significant?)
- Stories on people or projects working towards social and economic justice ("Economic justice" is a great phrase ... read this as "taking money from innovative and hard-working folks to give it to lazy whiners."
- Original, underreported stories of local, regional, national, or global importance (That is, anything.)."

I'm not sure what censorship you have been talking about. I have frequented indymedia since its inception and I have seen the gambit of views allowed expressed even when it is posted by a frothing at the mouth anti-muslim bigot ranting incoherently. If they trim down a bit on this deluge of crap, I'm glad. I've never seen (and would be against) any censoring of coherent right wing article. It is good that such right wing rationalizing is posted. Especially ones that try to explain how the dictatorship of Pinochet was alright say as opposed to a democratically elected government like Hugo Chavez's. It is good such hypocrisy is posted and is allowed to be posted. One can easily use simple reason to shred it and wipe ones ass with. You right wingers are just peeved that there is at least one thriving hold out against the corporate megadisinformation networks of Fox and CNN and the rest. Cry all you want, throw your wittle fisties in the air in a snit but guess what? We will still be there telling the otherside of the story, the story that the vast majority of the world's people experience every day in sweat shops and occupied territories, in ghettos and state terrorized peasant villages.

Like Michael Parenti once said: "I will now convince you in less then five seconds that capitalism does not work- most of the world is poor and most of the world is capitalist."

Oops there I go using simple reason again!

"Most of the world is poor and most of the world is capitalist."

Communism is the reason why Cubans are so univerally rich - They all live in the same kind of palace that Castro lives in - a modern worker's utopia!

The makeshift boats are merely college students playing pranks.

Communism must also be the reason why the Soviet Union so successfully destroyed the West as an economic and ideological power, and her people live as kings.

Leftist policy under Saddam Hussein made the people of Iraq a social and economic force to be reckoned with. Their corrupt and unsuccesful neighbor Kuwait decided back in the '90s that Saddam would make a much better leader.

Meanwhile, back in the U.S., the oppressed masses suffer under death squads, power failures, open sewers, rampant disease, no social programs, little education, nonexistant health care, and no technology.

Let's hear a cheer for socialism!


I'm not sure what is more pathetic, that the moderator at IndyMedia NYC sees fit to come here to justify their pathetic policies, that they think anyone here really gives a crap what they think, or my answer, that fool actually thinks ANYONE read all that drivel!!!!!!!!!!!

They lost me at "loser".

Here's how the "editors" responded at sf.indymedia.org when Choam Nomsky's post against you was posted:

The following post has status hidden:
Far-Right Target's Indymedia!
by Choam Nomsky • Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 10:58 AM

The Far-Right is targeting Indymedia with slander and threats of censorship. We need to shut down these extreem rightwing threats! Overload their servers.

Far right sites, of the Zionazi variety, are planning on undermining Indymedia with slander and lies. The main culprits is a right-wing operator running a site called "A Small Victory" (see link below). The gameplan is to censor Indymedia by claiming (lying) that Indymedia censors. Yes Indymedia removes trash from far-right freepers who spam Indymedi with filthy jewpropganda. But that is not censorship! See this link and help us shut down this site:



This was hidden because
by one of the editors Tuesday August 26, 2003 at 05:07 PM

it contained a link to an enemy website. No, you may not advertise enemy websites here.

add your comments

link at: http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2003/08/1637990.php


Let's get real, actually.

The original post was not hidden for days on the michigan site. Everbody picked up on it, including Istapundit.

sf.indymedia stated clearly why they hid the post as I posted above. It had NOTHING to do with it being anti-semitic.

So is it free speech or not? For instance can I say GWBush is a nit wit and fucking up everything he touches. Arial Sharon is a butcher and had his hand in several massacres. The Isreali state is in violation of many UN resolutions. Finally the guy that runs this site is a right wing crank.