Is there censorship of the news in America

yes	8 votes - 22 %
no	1 vote - 2 %
yes, getting worse	21 votes - 60 %
yes, european news more free	2 votes - 5 %
yes, uk news more free	1 vote - 2 %
no, you are wrong to suggest it	0 votes - 0 %
freedom is an ongoing figt	1 vote - 2 %
the internet is our hope	1 vote - 2 %
the internet is screwed	0 votes - 0 %
google is dangerous/scary	0 votes - 0 %

35 Total Votes

CENSORSHIP OF NEWS IN AMERICA -- Google Turns Off Uruknet | 26 comments (26 topical, editorial, 0 hidden)

tip jar (4.00 / 15)

i want to be a front page writer. just so i don't get flamed anymore. please recommend me to Jerome a Paris. i just want to write and be free.

by GraceReid on Sun Jun 12th, 2005 at 11:15:17 PM EST

The URUKNET blackout (4.00 / 4)

is news because it's "new," but heavy censorship of the information fed to us through US outlets has been going on for what is beginning to seem like forever.

For a long time now, we have had to go out looking for the News You Won't Find on CNN or Fox News. Without shortwave and the Internet, all of us here would be subsisting on a strict information regimen of Kool-Aid News.

by moiv on Mon Jun 13th, 2005 at 01:28:09 AM EST

Re: CENSORSHIP OF NEWS IN AMERICA -- Google Turns (4.00 / 4)

there is one good result of google banning uruknet... as soon as the story broke on dailykos - i bookmarked the site! i look forward to reading uruknet AND eurotrib!

again, thank you all for inviting those of us across the sea!

by edrie on Mon Jun 13th, 2005 at 02:09:31 AM EST

Re: CENSORSHIP OF NEWS IN AMERICA -- Google Turns (4.00 / 3)

I don't know what the facts of this story really are:
presumably Google will have an anodyne explanation for
this "misunderstanding". In any case, I remain convinced that it would be a very good thing if the European Community sponsored one (or preferably more than one) European search engine. By now Google-like search engines are recognizably a valuable tool in protecting
the modernized version of "freedom of the press", and
as such is much too valuable to be left in the hands of
a monopoly or oligopoly.

Hannah K. O'Luthon

by Hannah K OLuthon on Mon Jun 13th, 2005 at 03:02:18 AM EST

Re: CENSORSHIP OF NEWS IN AMERICA -- Google Turns (4.00 / 2)

I remember when they delisted Indymedia.org from Google News because someone in the open publishing column (comperable to the diaries here and at dKos) used a term like 'zionist nazi' or some such. people pointed out that a different referenced site used the word 'islamofascist', and also that google could link only to 'editorially approved' indymedia articles, but no matter.

by Media Revolution on Mon Jun 13th, 2005 at 07:13:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: CENSORSHIP OF NEWS IN AMERICA -- Google Turns (none / 1)

Sensorship for sure, and so many people are not even aware - they would even protest the notion.
As alternative to Google, check this Europe-based search engine out:
Alltheweb

by ask on Mon Jun 13th, 2005 at 04:54:05 AM EST

someone please explain (none / 0)

does this mean if I google a subject,let's say the war in Iraq, I will no longer get the hits from European papers?

Help us Europe, you're our only hope. Our media is protecting the village idiot and have declared him King. = )

by TeresaInPa (Teese02aATYahoo.com) on Mon Jun 13th, 2005 at 05:46:15 AM EST

Re: CENSORSHIP OF NEWS IN AMERICA -- Google Turns (none / 1)

I once wrote to Google about a similar problem. There was a long delay in the response I received from them, but once they got around to it, they did address my complaint. This could be a simple case of worker bees trying to keep up with the internet, or it could go far beyond that. I was reading a regular news source off Google News, and it was dropped. I wrote to ask why. It took them two weeks to address my concerns, but it was put back on eventually.

by Upstate NY on Mon Jun 13th, 2005 at 05:47:09 AM EST

Re: CENSORSHIP OF NEWS IN AMERICA -- Google Turns (none / 1)

When this was posted on Kos, there was considerable skepticism that it was a true report. So why is it being posted here? Particularly, it is about the US, not Europe. The substantiation appears weak. And the Kos posting was days ago.

Their freedom lost, all virtue lose. - Milton

by Viktor Runeberg on Mon Jun 13th, 2005 at 05:51:18 AM EST

Uruknet was delisted from June 4th - June 10th (none / 1)

That people were sceptical does not change the fact that Uruknet was de-listed for almost 7 full days, and that when it was listed again, those stories were still missing from the listing.

It is here on European Tribune because this is an issue the news of the world is being controlled so the American people do not have access to certain types of stories.

Google is international. The rules for Google China are do not use the word "democracy", the rules for Google Italy are list the Uruknet, the rules for Google America, are go where Michelle Malkin directs you (in one case)

by GraceReid on Mon Jun 13th, 2005 at 08:33:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

no problem here (none / 0)

I have no problem finding URUKNET via google.nl

by amsterdam on Mon Jun 13th, 2005 at 07:28:51 AM EST

Fact-checking (none / 0)

I must admit I certainly can't remember hearing the president of the United States "boast that he had summarily executed 3,000 Afghani prisoners" during the 2003 state of the union, but let's not delve into that here.

A simple search on google for the term "iraq" with uruknet specified as site, gives plenty of hits, see for yourself: Google Search

There dosn't seem to be any censoring of uruknet from Googles part. Disappointing that a cross-posting from DailyKOS, which main claim is so easily dispelled, is getting recommended...

Biilmann Blog

by BobFunk (bobfunk@clanwhiskey.net) on Mon Jun 13th, 2005 at 07:29:45 AM EST

Let's check the facts (none / 0)

National Lawyers Guild Calls for
Prosecution of President Bush for Role in Torture
National Lawyers Guild 18 June 2004
www.globalresearch.ca 20 June 2004
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/NLG406A.html
______________
2003 State of the Union Address Contained Implicit Admission
The National Lawyers Guild calls for the prosecution of President George W. Bush with a "command responsibility" theory of liability under the War Crimes Act. Bush can be prosecuted under the War Crimes Act or the Torture Statute, if he knew or should have known about the U.S. military's use of torture and failed to stop or prevent it. A comment in the President's January 2003 State of the Union Address contained an implicit admission by Bush that he had sanctioned the summary execution of many when he said: "All told, more than 3,000 suspected terrorists have been arrested in many countries, and many others have met a different fate." "Let's put it this way," he continued, "they are no longer a problem for the United States and our friends and allies."

by GraceReid on Mon Jun 13th, 2005 at 08:27:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Let's check the facts (none / 0)

I'm not really interesting in defending Bush's western rhetorics, but interpretation of words is not what I call facts. And personally I don't see how that statement can be taken to be a boast of having "summarily executed 3,000 Afghani prisoners".

I read your clarification further up that uruknet was just missing in Googles index for 7 days. Here's what Googles Information for webmasters have to say about that:

"Each time we update our database of webpages, our index shifts: we find new sites, we lose some sites, and sites' rankings change. If your site was dropped from Google and you haven't made major changes to it, we'll likely pick it up again soon."

Biilmann Blog

by BobFunk (bobfunk@clanwhiskey.net) on Mon Jun 13th, 2005 at 09:33:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Not with an index as high as Uruknet (none / 0)

That may happen with sites with a lower index, but not in this case. There was no fluctuation. It was de-listed.

"It isn't the first time that Google discontinues indexing Uruknet. A few months ago, Google.news removed Uruknet.info as a news source, apparently thanks to Michelle Malkin's protestations and reinstated our website only of because of many complaint letters from our readers."

by GraceReid on Mon Jun 13th, 2005 at 09:57:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

National Lawyers Guild is 6,000 members (none / 0)

They heard it as I did. Marjorie Cohn heard it, too, and wrote about it in t r u t h o u t. You didn't hear it.

The story of the "Convoy of Death" was filmed by an Irishman.

by GraceReid on Mon Jun 13th, 2005 at 10:08:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

type uruknet into google search on news (none / 0)

you will find that there is no listing between the 4th and the 10th.

by GraceReid on Mon Jun 13th, 2005 at 10:11:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Coalition of the Bribed and Coerced (none / 0)

This is what is so severe about Bushco and so dangerous for America. He has totally destroyed alliances we've had for more than 100 years. And our news organizations don't report things...the White House bullies them.

Amero-fascism.

We cannot solve the problems of today using the same thinking that produced them. (Einstein) http://www.noquarterusa.net

by DrKate on Mon Jun 13th, 2005 at 09:17:02 AM EST

A small example... (none / 1)

Do you make your friends break the law with you?

This is an interesting statement. In Canada we are currently discovering the horrific events in the case of Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen who was rendered to Syria and tortured for one year after being detained on a stop-over in New York.

Hearings are underway to determine culpability, why it took so long for Cdn officials to intervene with Syria on Arar's behalf, and what information the RCMP and CSIS gave American officials etc.

What came out last week was particularly chilling. The US were prepared to release Arar on the condition that Canadian officials arrest and CONVICT him. Yes, convict. Forget about due process. The US would only release a Canadian citizen into Canadian hands if they promisted to convict and jail him. When Cdn officials said they couldn't promise that, Arar was rendered to Syria. And furthermore, the RCMP had told the US that there was not enough evidence to charge Arar.

This is ludicrous. And another incident that damages relationships. You cannot force countries to charge and jail people without proper due process.

I'm afraid if this is what we do know, how much worse are the things we don't.

by olivia on Mon Jun 13th, 2005 at 01:38:58 PM EST

Nope (none / 0)

I'm going to have to disagree with this one. There is certainly BIAS in the mainstream media in the US, but that's not the same as censorship. Plenty of publishers openly print anti-government material. And the Internet has very broad (perhaps not very deep, though) content. My shortwave radio doesn't detect jamming of stations from other countries.

What we DO have is a population that doesn't always stop to think about where their information is coming from, and a media industry that is mainly about making money. But it's pretty clear that the U.S. government doesn't actively censor the news--otherwise we wouldn't know about the DSM, for example.

Perhaps there is a counterexample of a news item that was available in, say, Europe, that was not available in the U.S.?

by asdf on Mon Jun 13th, 2005 at 11:27:14 PM EST

Great Example (none / 0)

The RAF double bombing campaign of 2002 was reported in the UK on the 29th of May. What date, if ever, was it reported in the US news?

by GraceReid on Tue Jun 14th, 2005 at 01:36:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Answer: It was never reported (none / 0)

Xenox News (satire), Australia - Jun 3, 2005
... on new evidence showing that "The RAF and US ... defend itself from a foreign attack: bombing Iraq's air defenses ... Press report noted in November 2002, "Those costly ...

The Smoking Bullet in the Smoking Gun
Common Dreams, ME - Jun 3, 2005
... on new evidence showing that "The RAF and US ... defend itself from a foreign attack: bombing Iraq's air defenses ... Press report noted in November 2002, "Those costly ...

A Public Secret
Iraq Occupation Watch, CA - Jun 2, 2005
... on new evidence showing that "The RAF and US ... defend itself from a foreign attack: bombing Iraq's air defenses ... Press report noted in November 2002, "Those costly ...

A Public Secret
Yahoo News - Jun 1, 2005
... on new evidence showing that "The RAF and US ... defend itself from a foreign attack: bombing Iraq's air defenses ... Press report noted in November 2002, "Those costly ...

RAF bombing raids tried to goad Saddam into war
Infoshop News - May 31, 2005
THE RAF and US aircraft doubled the rate at which they were dropping bombs on Iraq in 2002 in an attempt to provoke Saddam Hussein into giving the allies an ...

Smoking Bullet in the Smoking Gun?
uruknet.info, Italy - May 29, 2005
... 1) Did the RAF and the United States military increase the rate that they were dropping bombs in Iraq in 2002? ... any such increase in the rate of bombing in Iraq ...

RAF bombing raids tried to goad Saddam into war
uruknet.info, Italy - May 29, 2005
May 29, 2005 - THE RAF and US aircraft doubled the rate at which they were dropping bombs on Iraq in 2002 in an attempt to provoke Saddam Hussein into giving ...

US and RAF bombing raids on Iraq
Questions and Observations - May 29, 2005
It's remarkable what passes for news these days: THE RAF and US aircraft doubled the rate at which they were dropping bombs on Iraq in 2002 in an attempt to ...
US aircraft doubled bombing raids on Iraq in 2002 to provoke ...

Collective Bellaciao, France - May 29, 2005
THE RAF and US aircraft doubled the rate at which they were dropping bombs on Iraq in 2002 in an attempt to provoke Saddam Hussein into giving the allies an ...
As new revelations surface in London, congressman readies new ...

Raw Story, MA - May 29, 2005
... 1) Did the RAF and the United States military increase the rate that they ... was the justification for any such increase in the rate of bombing in Iraq at this ...

RAF bombing raids tried to goad Saddam into war
Times Online, UK - May 28, 2005
THE RAF and US aircraft doubled the rate at which they were dropping bombs on Iraq in 2002 in an attempt to provoke Saddam Hussein into giving the allies an ...

The war before the war
New Statesman, UK - May 26, 2005
... British officials insist that no RAF aircraft opened ... when the Prime Minister discussed Iraq with President ... had retaliated against the bombing offensive, thus ...

by GraceReid on Tue Jun 14th, 2005 at 01:40:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Answer: It was never reported (none / 0)

You just proved my point by listing a dozen places where, in the US, I can read this story. In China, where the government actually does censor the press (and the Internet), there are stories that are simply not available at all.

A bad mainstream media is different from censorship.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/aptech_story.asp?category=1700&slug=China%20Microsoft

by asdf on Tue Jun 14th, 2005 at 07:46:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes and no (none / 0)

One week ago when I did a search for stories on "illegal""war""Iraq" stories from USA were 3.5% of all 2,040 stories listed, and of those 99% were letters to the editor or alternative media. Today stories from USA "illegal war iraq" are more like 20% of total. MSM.

I guess we are in shades of grey here. Where the situation in China where Google is under agreement to censor the term "democracy" is the extreme end and what I have experienced which is a blackout that has become more conspicuous as time goes on.

Michael Getler, ombudsman for the Washington Post addressed the issue in his article, "News Over There, Not Over Here." He took his paper and Walter Pincus to task for not covering the Downing Street Minutes. Walter said he was too busy covering the UK election.

Within a week, Getler said that the story should have been front paged, that it was "journalistically mandatory."

I am talking about managing the news, filtering the news and managing public opinion. The news stories that are not to be found are "illegal""war""Iraq." The UK, involved in the same war, and the Blair administration involved in the same illegalities.. their coverage of "illegal""war""Iraq" outnumbers US stories by about 8 to 1.

More Americans are getting their US news from UK sources than ever. There is a reason for this.

I can't find a journalist to say, "My editor would not let me run this story because it cast too harsh a light on the Bush administration's questionable basis for going to war in Iraq."

To institute editorial standards like this is the opposite of good journalism, and an abdegnation of the role of the fourth estate as watchdog over all the branches of government, especially to keep an eye on the executive branch and foreign policy.

So I say the news is managed, filtered controlled and blacked out, although in answer to the hue and cry in the last 6 weeks, there has been more of a biting edge to some journalists... who seem to have been waiting... asking "Is it safe to come out?"

by GraceReid on Tue Jun 14th, 2005 at 08:50:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Agreed (none / 0)

Well I certianly agree that the news is managed, filtered, controlled, and blacked out by the news media. But that's nothing new; every news source has a viewpoint.

What bothers me about the cry of "censorship" is that there is a big, big difference between a government that actively prevents people from finding out what is going on, like in North Korea and China, and a news media that responds to its readers by giving them what they want--even if what they want is trash.

Here in the U.S. the information is available, but we're just too disinterested, or lazy, to care about it. That's not censorship.

by asdf on Tue Jun 14th, 2005 at 11:21:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I like you (none / 0)

Earlier I was thinking about things you said, and I had a little argument all prepared... it went like this. person a is saying that it's bad to have so much chemical additives in their food and person b is saying compare yourself to someone who has no food.

i don't mind. of COURSE there's a big big difference, but who is going to fight the encroachment of Big Brother? Who is going to even notice it? It is subtle.

Now the woman who said "Sure, there's censorship of the news in America," she's Irish. Michael in the kitchen he's Irish too. The whole country is full of Irish. And the consensus opinion here is that news is censored in America, but that you're not allowed to say it, and you wouldn't be able to prove it.

Anytime you're not allowed to say something, that's censorship. These people are saying there are certain stories you're not allowed to report. That's their understanding.

There's three people here. One the Irish woman, two there's me, and three an Italian woman. Now our consensus opinion is that there is censorship, or management to make sure things don't get said or reported, in America. That's what we seem to be saying.

That it is not as bad as somewhere else doesn't make it not so.

I grew up in freedom. It was a condition I enjoyed. I know what it was like, and what it is like now.

Freedom is a fight. A constant fight. Taking risks and taking the heat. Complacency gives the powers that be license to encroach even more.

by GraceReid on Tue Jun 14th, 2005 at 11:37:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

CENSORSHIP OF NEWS IN AMERICA -- Google Turns Off Uruknet | 26 comments (26 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Is there censorship of the news in America

Top Diaries

What's Next, After the Slam?

Shock Election Loss Rutte IV In Senate Race

Honduras Establishes Close Ties with China

A Return to Normalcy?

A Grand Slam for Ireland?

Recent Diaries

History Hillsdale College, Alumni and Domestic Terror

Struggle NWO Unipolar or Multilateralism

Neo-Nazi Marches Across Europe

Fascism Unites America, Israel and EU Neo-Nazis

What's Next, After the Slam?

Settler Extremism Blessed by Jerusalem Leaders

US Interference In Lebanon-Syria-Ira
q

City Agriculture - March 17, 2023

Shock Election Loss Rutte IV In Senate Race

Stalemate Endures, Pessimism Grows, Deaths Mount

Honduras Establishes Close Ties with China

A Grand Slam for Ireland?

Living In Spain and Social-Democracy

USA Censorship Act to Kill Disinformation

Flying Fortresses and Nuclear Threat

Universal Criticism Asylum Threshold EU Fortress

China Trade and Relations

SBU As a Terror Network

A Return to Normalcy?

Georgia and Foreign Agents or Spy Law

Occasional Series