Earlier this year, over 70 nationalist cyberactivists, led by Joe Middleton (yes, him!) signed up to a Bin the Scotsman boycott pledge, claiming that the newspaper was “hopelessly biased” against nationalism and “obviously controlled by the British Government”.
And now the self-confessed Juan Kerr has started a similar Bin the Herald pledge, this time insisting that the Glasgow paper’s recent move to a pre-moderated comments forum, within which the vicious personal abuse which had become endemic on the political threads could be eliminated, represents “ministerial bullying”, an infringement of “freedom of speech” rights, and that the publishers are “lickspittle's [sic] and yes men for their governmental masters in westminster”.
The CyberNats are obviously delusional, but worse than that: they’re hypocritical. The stated motives for the two pledges are incompatible. Press freedom is a key part of freedom of speech.
Halftime in America
30 minutes ago
I suspect the "Weegie"'s lawyers had a big say in this.
As I understand it, a website owner is responsible for all the content therein, no matter who contributed it.
And caselaw is apparently building up to the effect that content can be prosecuted under the laws of the place where it is *read*, no matter where it originated or is hosted.
So, for example, the rather tighter German and Austrian laws on "hate crime" can be brought to bear on any website which can be read there.
And, apparently, the Euro Arrest Warrant can allow the German or Austrian police to require such miscreants to be picked up anywhere in the EU.
Whatever you think about all that, it is likely that unmoderated media blogs will go the way of the dodo.
A bunch of not necessarily connected observations.
Whilst I am always disappointed when moderation is introduced, I am neither surprised nor overly sorry in this case. Although, the lack of moderation outwith 1800 - 0900 hrs will strangle conversation a bit.
Online resources such as The Herald (or Scotsman or BBC News Have Your Say) do not appear to have a dedicated blog section. Instead they stick-up print articles, sans web-links, for punters to respond to. A bunch of nutters get the ego-boost of their 'views' being promoted on a well-known page around t'world. The page owers get free publicity and advertizing for a service which has already eaten into print sales.
Unless one came before 1000 hrs, the comments boxes would have quickly filled-up with a handful of regulars. One, two hundred post threads were commonplace. There was no sense of community, or opportunity to discuss the matter in hand. Just drive-by-shooting.
Most of the spoilers were simply half-wits with a proprietorial attitude, but some genuinely un-nerved me as I suspected they were barely concealing their inner violence. This applies to both 'sides' of the debate, although adversarial nationalism is always the best way to express that inner violence. Thus I feel happier with posting by my real name.
And, of course, there is no censorship; at The Herald site or this blog. Freedom of speech does not guarantee a venue, with the complainants not being silenced elsewhere and are perfectly welcome to set-up their own blogs (and have no-one read them, which I suspect is the reason).
As for this title article, I have been privileged to witness some of the best troll-baiting outs on the Internet and participated myself. All trolls, not just 'Cybernats' make amusing distractions, but mocking of them is best conducted when they appear in comments boxes and attempt to divert them down their own fantasies. They remain powerless individuals raging against the dying light, and no doubt have small penes. Blogs which claim to wish to discuss political issues should concentrate on those individuals with newspaper columns (also, I suppose, other bloggers) or some sort of officially-sanctioned voice.
It's tricky really... I read your posts often with great interest, and the CyberNats do seem to be absolutely positively mad. Problem is though, they're just 'those sort of people'. The irritating sort that just say whatever comes to their heads, despite often lacking in any logic whatsoever.
Always good reading and good banter though.
As a Scottish nationalist who enjoys using the internet I think it's true to say that I am a cybernat. Yet I don't understand, identify or associate with the people you continuously quote as 'the cybernats'. I object to your cybernatist and cybernatophobic attitude.
Thanks very much SM753/AM2 - I knew you would take the bate thanks for comfirming.
http://www.pledgebank.com/bintheherald
Oh, And how can it be media manipulation when I mention it is a democracy thing regading all parties and all voters. The only thing I would like to maniplute is draconian censorship (not a uniquely nationlist position)
What 2 pledges are you waffling about the bin the Scotsman was by Joe Middleton, I do not share his or HER brain.
You were the only person on her protest to stick up for the hootsmon, could this be because the Scottish boards have more Independnece supporters and you need the help? Beaten gubbed and weak that is effectively what your saying. Need a higher power to step in because your arguments are flawed,weak and confabulations?
Media censorship is damaging to all. You included.
You're not dealing from a full-pack, are you, Juan? You're being allowed to post here, and still you're crying censorship!
Tell you what, write a letter to The Herald offices actually paying for a stamp, and don't use green ink to write it. When they, and I suspect they will, reply that the comments boxes were leaving them wide open to defamation suits and even investigations under criminal law, why don't you offer to pay any costs?
You know, money, mouth.
Polunskers, 'cybernat' refers to that strange phenomenon of Pennywise coming out to play when someone hides behind a computer mask. I don't know what your involvement is in party politics, but any one of us has a responsibility to combat intolerance attaching to our camps.
You take an active opposition to anti-English/Union bigotry and pro-Union bods do so when they see anti-Scottish bigotry in the English and/or British media. Deal?
"Cybernatist" and "cybernatophobic"?! Thanks for the laugh. I disagree with you; get over it! You'll be accusing me of incitement or hate crimes next. Sheesh!
The Herald's new set up might not be perfect, but I worry about anyone who thinks that what went before wasn't in need of reform.
Fancy that SM753 in at the first post.......The mind bogles.
"Alec" I don't think he is your type ;-) might want to remove yer toungue.
I don't really care what you all think. My opinion is MY opinion I do not make it for anyone else. Whereas your happy to go along with someone elses.
Get some dignity and backbone or forever increase in sycophancy!
OK, "full-pack" vs "backbone" etc. Let's just say the score is one-all. Now, civility, please!
I don't really care what you all think.
You care enough to keep replying to me.
My opinion is MY opinion I do not make it for anyone else.
But if a third party site, which you in no maintain maintain or finance, does not allow you airtime to express this opinion to others, you threaten to picket it.
Whereas your happy to go along with someone elses.
I have disagreed with blog articles about anonymous Internet posters. Do you think this is my idea of rough-sex?
Can you understand why I think you're being a tad inconsistent?
(Stuart, what about those who think the mildest murmur of support for The Herald can come only from employees or bat-men for SU?)
The activity of the so-called
liberal press was the work of
grave-diggers for the German
people and the German Reich
— Hitler
by Eugen Hadamovsky (Oldenburg: Gerhard Stalling, 1933).
The kind of journalism these men have developed (they call it free, independent, neutral, nonpartisan, above party, and objective — ever and again objective) must be replaced or Germany will disappear. There is but one objective worthy of the full effort of the press — the nation. And the only justifiable objectivity is that which serves the cause of the nation
Thank you for dragging the thread down to the hysterical depths, Nikostratos. The UK is on a par with Nazi Germany, minus the mass round-ups of civilians and mass executions of opponents.
You are a bit creepy.
AM2 - "Scottish Unionist said...
OK, "full-pack" vs "backbone" etc. Let's just say the score is one-all. Now, civility, please!
November 15, 2008 3:22 PM"
Granted. But he is a wee bit funny. Just keep an eye out. ;-)
Sorry if Scottish politics is a little too savage and verbaly thrusting.We are all passionate people.And the majority of us still hold onto the old Labour ideals of equality and fairness.
Take Tibet for example. Alec , you shurely cannot back browns stance on this? It is a shocking betrayal of Tibetan peoples dignity, life, and future. All for Chinese backing. If your true to your word you cannot with all conscience back Brown position. This not a Labour / Snp thing.Too important for that. This is a basic human decency issue and not use people as political currency too big yourself up on the world stage.