I'm not sure why it is, but every time I post a comment on a story at news.com.au, it is never published. Ever.
And I'm not the only one.
I would love to get an insight into their acceptance criteria, especially as not one of my posts were offensive in any way. And I have seen posts critical of the site or the pieces author published in the past.
When you go through the comments section on a story (they're my favourite part!), the level of intelligence at times is highly questionable, and the spelling is beyond embarrassing. Almost as embarrassing as the spelling mistakes you see in a significant number of the articles themselves- there is no doubt proof-reading as an occupation no longer exists at news.com.au
And doesn't that really say something?
I can't get a comment through, but "Mrgaycunt lolcatsmagvin" can!
When the site you want to support doesn't even have the respect to communicate with you as an intelligent individual?
Are they actively trying to support the dumbing down of the population?
Or are they just lazy as hell?
I don't know the answers, but I do know I can't be bothered firing comments down a black hole, never to be published. Especially when Des and Shirleen from Murambibra can rant in almost unintelligible 'Strayan' about "what a pack of mongrels" the Government are, on a story regarding Muslim clerics pushing Shariah law in Western Sydney.
I'll just start commenting here, where they have less than no power to decide what I say. Suck it.
My other bone to pick with news.com.au, is that I hate it when their headlines are totally fallacious (this happens all the time).
Ie: The American man who "built a nuclear reactor in his house".
He didn't. He built a fusion reactor (totally different, and much safer) in a warehouse he rents (for such purposes).
Here's another one-
"Cameron called to Court to explain Avatar origins."
No, he wasn't! It's a Chinese court for a start, and James Cameron has gone on record saying he started work on Avatar 15 years ago, which predates the Chinese work by 10 years. So if anything, "Cameron countersues" would have been a bit closer to the truth.
I know I shouldn't be surprised, but I am. It's only out of pure boredom that I visit these news sites, and I'm always rewarded with fresh loads of...well...total untruth. And if they feel that I'm wrong, please attempt to sue me. That would be great. maybe you could subpoena James Cameron!
"HAYDA Bastani couldn't fiance Fadi Ibrahim in the face as she sat accused of plotting revenge murder."
Is that a sentence?
US President Barack's plan to redirect astronauts to inspect asteroids and eventually set foot on Mars is back on track.
President Barack? Are we on a first name basis now?
"aBut it seems the showbiz break-up of Kyle Sandilands and his much-younger bride Tamara Jaber has had the opposite effect..."
Need I say more?
"A rspokesman for the Palin family"
"This, even with the support of the judges who consistently give top marks to the Scarlett Belle band member.""BRITISH police have confirmed they shot at fugitive Raoul Moat with a Taser during an six-hour stand-off." And after all the inaccuracies and mistakes news.com.au lets loose with on any given day, they actually scare quote this quote from Holger Sierks of Germany's Max Planck Institute, when he said "more than 400 "phantastic images'' showed many craters and details."
The guy's German. He can write phantastic if he wants, without some idiot excuse for an online newspaper scare quoting him over it. If they actually had a proof-reader over there, they might have even hit him with a (sp), just to distance themselves from that assault on the English language. Morons.
The most concerning aspect of news.com.au's behaviour, stems from this.
Try telling me that's not a hot topic! Even the Government is trying to do the right thing (in a very profit-motivated and twisted way), by making cigarettes just too expensive to buy. And Coles supermarkets, instead decide the best course of action (again, in a very profit-motivated and twisted way) is to make cigarettes available cheaply, thus circumventing the Governments efforts to (make more money from taxes) limit the supply.
The story invites readers to comment below it. I did (of course it wasn't published). But the interesting thing is- there are NO COMMENTS AT ALL.
Adelaide Now pulled the same trick with this article, making me wonder what the connections are behind the scenes?
Did Coles threaten to pull advertising on Rupert Murdoch-owned magazines (especially Master-Chef magazine) if comments were allowed? What's going on here? Because whether you smoke or not (and hopefully you don't), you're probably going to have a comment-worthy opinion to post in the comments section.
*Tumbleweed rolls by...*
So, as well as outright lying, putting spin on stories, and barely being able to construct a sentence, the 25 'journalists' who work for Rupert Murdoch's "News website of the Year", control the flow of information by shutting off comments for current stories.
My view is that the whole anti-Coles story was printed so Woolworths (which Murdoch has business/publishing partnerships with) could say for the record that they "would not follow the example of Coles", while avoiding a comments section that would pose the question- Why is Woolworth selling cigarettes to the public anyway? Aren't they "The fresh food people"? If they're so fresh and green, and healthy and family, why do they sell a product designed solely as a delivery device for an addictive and deadly coctail of drugs and chemicals?
Food for thought, right there.
So while they can shut down the comments on that piece of pro-Woolworths (read: The Competition) spin, they can't stop me from writing about it here, in a different corner of the internet, safely out of their control.
Suck it, Murdoch.
There are other bare-faced examples of rampant bullshit, but I'm late for an appointment. Maybe I'll edit some more in later.
This is knifey, from 'the internet'.