More Holland Sentinel Censorship

[John Galt]

I was following the deputy city attorney sex scandal on the sentinel:

http://www.myzeeland.com/news/x311589366/21-y...

and a number of people commented on how the Sentinel was going a bit too far splashing this man's face everywhere considering the attorney hadn't been charged. This where well written comments not in violation of any of the so called "pool rules".

I don't want to debate the pro's and con's of this, but I did notice this morning all comments where deleted.

Apparently the Sentinel cannot take any criticism.

[Ian]

John Galt wrote:

Apparently the Sentinel cannot take any criticism.

Apparently J?
Hasn't that been known for sometime now?

Is it boycot time yet?
Got your banners and pickets and side arms ready?
This could be fun.

[John Galt]

Ian wrote:

"Apparently J?
Hasn't that been known for sometime now?"

That is true Ian, but I think a few here needed a reminder of how the Sentinel conducts business.

I've already canceled my subscription and do whatever I can to expose their hypocrisy. Not sure what else we can do.

[Again]

The same thing happened with the child rape story.
First, the incorrect photo of the rapist, then when the correct photo was posted the comments where disabled because the rapist happened to be a black man.
The sentinel choose to protect a child rapists because he's black.
now thats racism!

[Ian]

Again wrote:

...then when the correct photo was posted the comments where disabled because the rapist happened to be a black man.

Suuuuuuure they did.

[bdwg]

Ian wrote:

<quoted text>
Suuuuuuure they did.

and of course Ian would know - being cozy and intimate with some of them....

[RKing]

JG,

Like I said, when you own the toilet, you can flush when ever you want.

[Mongoose]

Not only did the Sentinel delete the comments that had been written, they disabled the comment feature completely.

So much for the first amendment eh?

[Mongoose]

RKing, I don't know if you are the R. King that I know personally, but if you are him and/or you work at the Sentinel, why are the comments and thoughts of your readers not important enough to keep?

Certainly you don't expect all comments to be in keeping with the management of the paper. If when ever there is a dissenting comment, it is deleted, why have a comments section in the first place.

Just asking.

[Ian]

Isn't it the government that is supposed to be the one we "get" "free speech" from? NOT any private, or public, corporations etc???

You (not you G) complain when they let us run rampant (HSF) and then you complain more when they inhibit what we can and can't say?
They can't win can they?

Maybe some of us should make up our minds (principles) and stick to them...or not.

[John Galt]

RKing wrote:

JG,
Like I said, when you own the toilet, you can flush when ever you want.

That is actually a good analogy of the Holland Sentinel and it's staff.

Unfortunately, the citizen's of the Holland area suffer with such a poor excuse for a newspaper.

[John Galt]

Ian wrote:

Isn't it the government that is supposed to be the one we "get" "free speech" from? NOT any private, or public, corporations etc???
You (not you G) complain when they let us run rampant (HSF) and then you complain more when they inhibit what we can and can't say?
They can't win can they?
Maybe some of us should make up our minds (principles) and stick to them...or not.

And some of us should actually read the posts before they put their kneepads on.

I never said the Sentinel was violating the law.

I did say they behave in a continuing unethical manner by the censorship they engage in.

Now you are correct the 1st amendment to the Constitution comes into play here. I cherish the 1st amendment, and to see it spit upon by posers such as the Holland Sentinel sickens me. But it is not illegal nor have I ever stated that.

[Mongoose]

"Isn't it the government that is supposed to be the one we "get" "free speech" from? NOT any private, or public, corporations etc???" ~ Ian

NO Ian, it ISN'T THE GOVERNMENT that gives us free speech. Our freedoms come from God to the people, who then lend that power to the government.

People like you have it backasswards, thinking the government has the power to rule over the people and throw God out of the equation.

"..that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,..."

Endowed by their Creator, means; we get our unalienable rights from God.

See how that works?

[Ian]

"Endowed by their Creator, means; we get our unalienable rights from God."

Blah blah blah...
And the Supreme Court agrees with me.

Yur' better off keeping your church in church and your politics in reality.

"rights from god"...lol @ G
or...
God gives freedom of speech (sometimes...maybe...sort of)
and the Holland Sentinal takes it away.

rights from god...lol
backasswards is right G.

[WhiteFlag]

Governments do not grant free speech, people and patriots grant free speech.
I agree, to a point free speech comes from God but through hero's and again patriots.

I challenge the liberals here to put aside their hatred for the "right" just long enough to research some of the confirmed examples of censorship that have been enforced by our currant government.
If, you love your country as much as you claim, put aside partisan politics for a moment and seek the truth, you owe it to yourself and OUR children.

Forget about the "right" and the "left" and just be American for a few hours, forget that an article may be written by Beck or "some right wing blog" or some "left" wing blog and just learn something on your own.

Divide and conquer is as old as government itself and is still the number one rule of warfare, lets stop being divided long enough to learn who's dividing us because if we don't we surly will be conquered.

[bdwg]

good call WhiteFlag!

[Mongoose]

Ian, as an atheist and socialist, I don't expect you to understand or accept what I said about our freedoms coming from God, to the people then to the government.

White flag touched on it. Our freedoms come from, God inspired people, that are willing to fight and give what ever is necessary to possess the blessings of liberty.

As Thomas Jefferson once said; "The tree of liberty must be occasionally watered with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Like it or not Ian, Godly men founded this country and their words are filled with scriptural quotes and references to God. I know that sucks for you but that's the way it is.

[bonds77]

I agree, the government should not censor.

This "principle" should be lent to television and radio. I would think proponents of free speech here would agree. The Sentinel should be able to able to say "Obama is an F-ing idiot" if they want to.

I'm confused by your methods and goals, Galt. I thought you had alluded to being a business owner and capitalist. If you are, in fact that, then you should understand the right of that business to shut down your/others comments if they don't want them there.

If your business had a message board/comments and it said "Galt is a moron" over and over, are you saying you would leave it up?

The right of a free press is freedom from government, not freedom of the populace to deface it.

[John Galt]

You're confused Bonds because you don't bother to actually understand what is being said or even to read my replies.

You, like Ian, seem to be confusing my statements with others.

I never said the Sentinel was violating the law.

Journalism is a profession, and like many professions, they have a code of ethics. What follows is an exerpt:

"Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy.. The duty of the journalist is to further those ends by seeking truth and providing a fair and comprehensive account of events and issues. Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist's credibility."

http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp

Perhaps the Sentinel and it's staff do not consider themselves professions. They certainly lack integrity. When I see statements such as RKING's:

"Like I said, when you own the toilet, you can flush when ever you want."

It tends to re-enforce that thought.

I simply think Holland deserves better. Unfortunately I'm not capable of starting a newspaper myself but hopeful if enough people care, things might change.

[bonds77]

You CAN start a newspaper, buy they are dying.

Start a website. Make it an anti-gov't intrusion site. Plan events.

The Sentinel and SMT are two different ballgames, but you might take issue with Silent's censorship and abuse of status, too.