Tue Oct 29, 2013, 09:55 AM
Oilwellian (12,647 posts)
Democratic Underground Banned From Reddit/Politics Forum
There's a big write-up about it on Daily Kos, which was also banned.
This afternoon, the moderation team for the popular /r/politics subreddit announced a blacklist, banning such publications as Alternet, Drudgereport, Heritage Foundation, Huffington Post, Motherjones, National Review, Reason Magazine, Salon Magazine, Thinkprogress, Twitter, Vice.com, and many many more. Including, Dailykos.
With over three million members, the Reddit Politics forum has significant audience share. To block an entire domain and publisher from submission access will have major economic repercussions for any publication on that list. It will also diminish public recognition of any news published at those sites, now denied access. And thus, the free flow of information is diminished. The big-daddy of link and content aggregation sites on the 'net, Reddit has tens of millions of users worldwide. The site bills itself as, "...a source for what's new and popular on the web. Users like you provide all of the content and decide, through voting, what's good and what's junk." So it might interest many of these users to learn which sources the moderation team in Reddit's politics subreddit have sidelined by blacklist. And in so doing, to disenfranchise those users from their supposed vote. It might also surprise the community that what these moderators have blacklisted are some of the most well recognized publishers of political journalism on the web. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/10/28/1251324/-Reddit-Politics-Forum-Announces-Publisher-Blacklist Blacklist here.
|
110 replies, 10377 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
Oilwellian | Oct 2013 | OP |
In_The_Wind | Oct 2013 | #1 | |
Ranchemp. | Oct 2013 | #2 | |
liberal_at_heart | Oct 2013 | #3 | |
Kurska | Oct 2013 | #105 | |
sadatay | Oct 2013 | #108 | |
gopiscrap | Oct 2013 | #109 | |
LittleBlue | Oct 2013 | #4 | |
kentauros | Oct 2013 | #12 | |
LittleBlue | Oct 2013 | #16 | |
Oilwellian | Oct 2013 | #24 | |
liberal_at_heart | Oct 2013 | #26 | |
sadatay | Oct 2013 | #110 | |
JDPriestly | Oct 2013 | #49 | |
LeftyMom | Oct 2013 | #83 | |
NCLefty | Oct 2013 | #94 | |
Jackpine Radical | Oct 2013 | #5 | |
Chan790 | Oct 2013 | #27 | |
Jackpine Radical | Oct 2013 | #35 | |
warrior1 | Oct 2013 | #6 | |
Sheldon Cooper | Oct 2013 | #7 | |
lark | Oct 2013 | #45 | |
lark | Oct 2013 | #47 | |
JDPriestly | Oct 2013 | #50 | |
tblue | Oct 2013 | #52 | |
leveymg | Oct 2013 | #63 | |
Octafish | Oct 2013 | #101 | |
octoberlib | Oct 2013 | #8 | |
Oilwellian | Oct 2013 | #11 | |
Sunlei | Oct 2013 | #74 | |
Vashta Nerada | Oct 2013 | #9 | |
littlewolf | Oct 2013 | #10 | |
Sheepshank | Oct 2013 | #18 | |
littlewolf | Oct 2013 | #34 | |
Xithras | Oct 2013 | #48 | |
Raine1967 | Oct 2013 | #21 | |
Oilwellian | Oct 2013 | #29 | |
Raine1967 | Oct 2013 | #30 | |
Oilwellian | Oct 2013 | #32 | |
Raine1967 | Oct 2013 | #13 | |
Make7 | Oct 2013 | #82 | |
HappyMe | Oct 2013 | #14 | |
JCMach1 | Oct 2013 | #15 | |
kentauros | Oct 2013 | #20 | |
Dawgs | Oct 2013 | #36 | |
ronnie624 | Oct 2013 | #90 | |
Dawgs | Oct 2013 | #99 | |
madfloridian | Oct 2013 | #69 | |
Name removed | Oct 2013 | #17 | |
RebelOne | Oct 2013 | #59 | |
geek tragedy | Oct 2013 | #19 | |
Tuesday Afternoon | Oct 2013 | #54 | |
Jamaal510 | Oct 2013 | #72 | |
Coyotl | Oct 2013 | #22 | |
Mr Dixon | Oct 2013 | #23 | |
niyad | Oct 2013 | #25 | |
Pretzel_Warrior | Oct 2013 | #28 | |
Fumesucker | Oct 2013 | #43 | |
pa28 | Oct 2013 | #61 | |
ronnie624 | Oct 2013 | #91 | |
rdking647 | Oct 2013 | #31 | |
Ganja Ninja | Oct 2013 | #33 | |
Spitfire of ATJ | Oct 2013 | #53 | |
Dawgs | Oct 2013 | #37 | |
DJ13 | Oct 2013 | #76 | |
Dawgs | Oct 2013 | #98 | |
Dash87 | Oct 2013 | #38 | |
starroute | Oct 2013 | #60 | |
muriel_volestrangler | Oct 2013 | #93 | |
Blue_Tires | Oct 2013 | #39 | |
Capt. Obvious | Oct 2013 | #40 | |
Downwinder | Oct 2013 | #41 | |
MattSh | Oct 2013 | #42 | |
Fumesucker | Oct 2013 | #44 | |
geek tragedy | Oct 2013 | #55 | |
KittyWampus | Oct 2013 | #58 | |
MattSh | Oct 2013 | #107 | |
L0oniX | Oct 2013 | #100 | |
lumberjack_jeff | Oct 2013 | #46 | |
arikara | Oct 2013 | #77 | |
Hissyspit | Oct 2013 | #81 | |
arikara | Oct 2013 | #92 | |
Hissyspit | Oct 2013 | #104 | |
JHB | Oct 2013 | #106 | |
PCIntern | Oct 2013 | #97 | |
Zorra | Oct 2013 | #51 | |
Ian_rd | Oct 2013 | #56 | |
KauaiK | Oct 2013 | #57 | |
valerief | Oct 2013 | #65 | |
valerief | Oct 2013 | #62 | |
pa28 | Oct 2013 | #64 | |
Puzzledtraveller | Oct 2013 | #66 | |
bemildred | Oct 2013 | #67 | |
Dopers_Greed | Oct 2013 | #68 | |
toby jo | Oct 2013 | #70 | |
DFab420 | Oct 2013 | #71 | |
ismnotwasm | Oct 2013 | #73 | |
Kaleva | Oct 2013 | #75 | |
gopiscrap | Oct 2013 | #78 | |
LostOne4Ever | Oct 2013 | #79 | |
1000words | Oct 2013 | #80 | |
Rex | Oct 2013 | #84 | |
1000words | Oct 2013 | #85 | |
The Straight Story | Oct 2013 | #86 | |
Rex | Oct 2013 | #88 | |
The Straight Story | Oct 2013 | #89 | |
Eleanors38 | Oct 2013 | #102 | |
The Straight Story | Oct 2013 | #103 | |
TroglodyteScholar | Oct 2013 | #87 | |
BootinUp | Oct 2013 | #95 | |
mattclearing | Oct 2013 | #96 |
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 09:59 AM
In_The_Wind (71,789 posts)
1. Holy crap!
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:02 AM
liberal_at_heart (12,081 posts)
3. I know we have a few young people on DU but as someone approaching 40 we have to face it. DU
is kind of for older folks. Reddit users are younger. My 18 year old daughter uses Reddit everyday. She has never visited DU. Maybe they don't think we are new and popular enough. It doesn't really bother me all that much.
|
Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #3)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 03:54 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
105. I'm 22, I use DU.
Personally, I think the generally more mature and civil tone of dialog here is refreshing compared to a lot of other places on the web.
|
Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #3)
Thu Oct 31, 2013, 11:16 AM
sadatay (2 posts)
108. Reddit users are younger
I am 65 and use reddit every day. I have never much visited DU.
It is not that reddit doesn't think that DU is new and popular enough. This is specifically about the r/politics subreddit and the quality they want a subreddit with 3 million subscribers to have. I understand some of the choices that were banned—some are constant blogspammers, many like thinkprogress.org and alternet.org are sites which barely have any original content and simply use content from other sites to "compose" a story with an eye-catching headline, something of which HuffPost is also quite frequently guilty, and apparently so is DU. I certainly agree with banning sites like breitbart.com and infowars.com but not nationalreview.com or reason.com and certainly not MoJo or Salon. I am very unhappy with the latest shenanigans regarding r/politics and have let my feelings be known to the moderators, some of whom are equally unhappy and want to keep working on the list to have it more accurately reflect the goal of making the subreddit a quality one without censoring. But it appears all this emanates from the boys upstairs. |
Response to sadatay (Reply #108)
Thu Oct 31, 2013, 11:18 AM
gopiscrap (21,473 posts)
109. welcome to DU
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:03 AM
LittleBlue (10,362 posts)
4. In fairness, they also ban themselves
Banned Domains
The following is a list of major domains that have been banned by the moderators of /r/Politics and listed here in the interest of transparency: reddit.com |
Response to LittleBlue (Reply #4)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:16 AM
kentauros (29,414 posts)
12. I just saw that!
Which now makes me wonder if this whole thing is legit. Either that, or one of their mods was being cute, testing to see if the others even read the list...
|
Response to kentauros (Reply #12)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:19 AM
LittleBlue (10,362 posts)
16. I'll go out on a limb
and say that there are people posting rants from internet forums, possibly rants they wrote themselves. My guess is that the forum is supposed to be about posting main stream news outlets and making their own commentary, and not posting what amounts to blogging.
|
Response to LittleBlue (Reply #16)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:29 AM
Oilwellian (12,647 posts)
24. I go to their politics forum quite often
The posts are linked to news sources, not individual rants. I've seen several posts linking to an article via DU, hence the hit generated income for DU.
There are millions of members on Redditt, of all ages. I'm 58 so the comments about this being a young members site is just not true. I think they posted Reddit as a black listed site because there were probably many double posts occurring. Their politics forum is a sub-forum to their main site. |
Response to Oilwellian (Reply #24)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:31 AM
liberal_at_heart (12,081 posts)
26. demographics states otherwise. It is mainly a young person site.
Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #26)
Thu Oct 31, 2013, 11:35 AM
sadatay (2 posts)
110. Majority young persons but..
...with close to 70 million users, there are an awful lot of people who aren't kids who use it. And though it is mostly male, that still leaves a substantial number of women who use it. Also, I can guarantee you that a huge percentage of the 18 (and probably under) - 29 demo (though certainly not all) doesn't care about what goes on in r/politics. The young persons go to young persons' subreddits like r/funny, r/WTF, all the game subreddits, etc.
|
Response to LittleBlue (Reply #16)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:55 AM
JDPriestly (57,936 posts)
49. Mother Jones is valuable investigative reporting.
It's definitely news. The Huffington Post? That's not gossip. That's a good news source.
So what sources do they like other than Fox News? Did the New York Times make it to their list? |
Response to JDPriestly (Reply #49)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:46 PM
LeftyMom (49,212 posts)
83. The Huffington Post is an aggregator of clickbait, sideboob, celebrity puffpieces and
crap (re)written for free for "exposure" by aspiring writers too young to know better. Real news that appears there is boosted from sites that pay real reporters to do the actual work.
|
Response to LeftyMom (Reply #83)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 04:49 AM
NCLefty (3,374 posts)
94. Yes. Look at every SHOCKING, huge-font headline and it's unavoidable.
Not to mention the dreaded "3rd column" of side-boobery and other nonsense.
Huffington Post = Click-through rate + Advertising revenue |
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:04 AM
Jackpine Radical (45,274 posts)
5. Interesting.
I see ACLU is OK by them, while Breitbart, Drudge, DU, Kos & many others aren't. At least they seem to be hitting both sides of the political spectrum.
|
Response to Jackpine Radical (Reply #5)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:32 AM
Chan790 (20,176 posts)
27. Except not really...
they cherry-picked all the liberal-leaning sites from the top-10 linked sites then threw some conservative sites like Breitbart that never get linked there in as countermeasure to claim non-bias.
![]() |
Response to Chan790 (Reply #27)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:08 AM
Jackpine Radical (45,274 posts)
35. I was sorta wondering if the selection was unbiased.
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:04 AM
warrior1 (12,325 posts)
6. never heard of the joint
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:08 AM
Sheldon Cooper (3,724 posts)
7. It looks like they've banned pretty much everyone, including themselves:
Banned Domains
The following is a list of major domains that have been banned by the moderators of /r/Politics and listed here in the interest of transparency: aattp.org alternet.org amazon.com americanthinker.com avaaz.org b4in.info beforeitsnews.com blacklistednews.com borderlessnewsandviews.com breitbart.com breitbartunmasked.com change.org citypaper.com constitutioncampaign.org courthousenews.com crooksandliars.com dailybail.com dailycaller.com dailycurrant.com dailykos.com dailypaul.com democraticunderground.com deviantart.com dirtyuglypolitics.wordpress.com drudgereport.com eclectablog.com ecominoes.com facebook.com funnyordie.com generalstrikeusa.wordpress.com heavy.com heritage.org hotair.com huffingtonpost.com inagist.com indiegogo.com informationliberation.com infowars.com isidewith.com lifenews.com linkedin.com littlegreenfootballs.com mediamatters.org minx.cc motherjones.com myspace.com nation.foxnews.com nationalmemo.com nationalreport.net nationalreview.com nationsmith.com Newsbusters.org newsmakeup.wordpress.com newsvine.com newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport/ njspin.com omegle.com pensitoreview.com petitions.whitehouse.gov photographyisnotacrime.com policymic.com politicalwire.com politicususa.com politilady.com pollcode.com powerlineblog.com prisonplanet.com rawstory.com reason.com redd.it reddit.com redgage.com rightwingwatch.org salon.com signon.org smirkingchimp.com techdirt.com thebackbencher.co.uk theblaze.com thedailybanter.com thegatewaypundit.com theonion.com thepetitionsite.com therightscoop.com thinkprogress.org townhall.com truth-out.org twitchy.com twitter.com upworthy.com vice.com voiceblaze.com wallstreetonparade.com weaselzippers.us wikimedia.org wikipedia.org wnd.com Frankly, I think we're in good company. Although I admit to never using reddit, so maybe I don't know what I'm talking about. But when it comes to feminist issues, I hear NOTHING good about reddit. Edited to change the format, I didn't mean to underline half of this post. |
Response to Sheldon Cooper (Reply #7)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:47 AM
lark (17,345 posts)
45. Notice that RW Yahoo isn't banned.
F*ck Reddit, won't go there anymore.
|
Response to lark (Reply #45)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:50 AM
lark (17,345 posts)
47. Faux Snooze also not banned
Booo Reddit.
![]() |
Response to Sheldon Cooper (Reply #7)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:57 AM
JDPriestly (57,936 posts)
50. theonion???? They've got to be joking.
Response to Sheldon Cooper (Reply #7)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 12:00 PM
tblue (16,350 posts)
52. Dang. What's left?
I never use Reddit. I've never heard anybody ever even mention it.
|
Response to Sheldon Cooper (Reply #7)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 12:26 PM
leveymg (36,418 posts)
63. Looks like they took the politics out of their politics forum. Reddit is now less than useless.
Can't understand why anyone would even bother to go there for anything but recipes.
|
Response to leveymg (Reply #63)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 09:25 AM
Octafish (55,745 posts)
101. Defeats the purpose of reading.
I'd say it's ironic or iconic, but who has time for pun anymore?
|
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:08 AM
octoberlib (13,603 posts)
8. Sounds like Conservatives have infiltrated the moderation team,
Even though some conservative publications have been banned.
Unfortunately, /r/politics has extremely weak moderation right now and one moderator in particular (/u/theredditpope) combined with some hardcore conservatives (and other complacent and inactive mods) to make sure that redditors won't see reporting like this on mass shootings in America.
This was a huge win for the hardcore right - good investigative fact based journalism has repeatedly been damaging to the right on reddit. It is really important for them - and now /u/theredditpope apparently - that they don't allow redditors access to a factual catalogue of shootings as a part of their political discussion. In what world does this make sense in a sub called /r/politics? You got me. |
Response to octoberlib (Reply #8)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:16 AM
Oilwellian (12,647 posts)
11. Just like they did on Digg?
Some might remember that three years ago on Digg, a then popular link aggregation site similar to Reddit, a conspiracy was revealed whereby a conservative group had colluded to censor content there.
The popular link-sharing website Digg is investigating claims that a group of the site's "influential conservative" members are systematically downgrading thousands of stories deemed to be "liberal". Online magazine AlterNet claimed to have uncovered a group of Digg members – dubbed "Digg Patriots" – who have "censored hundreds of users, dozens of websites, and thousands of stories" from the site. Alternet alleged that the Digg Patriots, thought to number nearly 100 members, are "able to bury over 90% of articles by certain users and websites submitted within 1-3 hours". This could have a huge impact on DU's generated revenue. |
Response to Oilwellian (Reply #11)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 08:31 PM
Sunlei (22,647 posts)
74. I remember that on digg. Then the site got sold to some 'group'? & was ruined.
A couple months before the last Pres. election. Romney scissorhands and his minions hated that site.
|
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:13 AM
Vashta Nerada (3,922 posts)
9. Isn't reddit used by 13 year olds?
I've been there once, but the site looked like something from the late '90s.
|
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:15 AM
littlewolf (3,353 posts)
10. hmmm I have never used reddit. but it seems that they
went after republican as well as democratic sites with
equal vigor. |
Response to littlewolf (Reply #10)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:21 AM
Sheepshank (12,504 posts)
18. Freeperville is still accepted?
That bastion of hate, mysoginistic, gay bashing, twisted logic, full of fallacy, misquoted, misdirected, gun humping, lying sacks of putrid shit are welcome? interesting.
|
Response to Sheepshank (Reply #18)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:57 AM
littlewolf (3,353 posts)
34. I admit I did not notice that. I just saw what appeared to be
many right wing leaning sites. did not notice freeperville,
good catch. |
Response to Sheepshank (Reply #18)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:50 AM
Xithras (16,191 posts)
48. Reddit is for posting and discussing articles. Freeperville doesn't post articles.
DU Journals act like blogs and are citable references to articles posted elsewhere. In fact, you can write posts here on DU, post them to your journal, and use it just like any other blog if you really wanted to. While most DUers only post on the discussion boards to chat about politics, a number of people here do use their Journals to publish and centralize many of their writings. These get cross posted to Reddit now and then.
Reddit isn't used to continue discussions from other discussion boards, because "discussions" aren't really citable "articles". DU Journals provided a way around that limitation and were the source of DU content they are now banning. Free Republic, on the other hand, has no equivalent blogging or journaling capability and is simply a pure, old fashioned (very, very old fashioned) discussion board. Because of their format, they've never had a presence on Reddit, and there's no need to ban them. |
Response to littlewolf (Reply #10)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:22 AM
Raine1967 (11,445 posts)
21. Did you see this at the link?
UPDATE #1: dkos user olliegarkey posted a fascinating comment with an embedded graph showing that many of the most submission sites banned in this policy shift.
![]() Note the placement of Rawstory, Dailykos, Alternet, Thinkprogress, and Huffingtonpost. dkos User subterranian responded by arguing a partisan bent to the bans: So they banned both right and left wing sites so it looks "balanced" in a simple list. But by actual traffic, it's entirely left wing sites that were banned. Not equally vigorous. |
Response to Raine1967 (Reply #21)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:38 AM
Oilwellian (12,647 posts)
29. Yes, I did see that
It's also very similar to what happened on Digg a couple of years ago. Very similar banning signature.
|
Response to Oilwellian (Reply #29)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:41 AM
Raine1967 (11,445 posts)
30. It does remind me of what happened over with Digg.
I don;t like this at all -- I'm not even a redditor --
|
Response to Raine1967 (Reply #30)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:50 AM
Oilwellian (12,647 posts)
32. It is disturbing
Any attempt to manipulate information, especially if the majority are young adults, is VERY disturbing. Let the members decide what is considered reliable and let their votes allow it to rise to the top of the heap. Reddit is suppose to be politically neutral.
|
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:17 AM
Raine1967 (11,445 posts)
13. MOTHER JONES???
This doesn't bode well for reddit.
|
Response to Raine1967 (Reply #13)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:38 PM
Make7 (8,045 posts)
82. Seriously? What the hell? ( n/t )
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:17 AM
HappyMe (20,277 posts)
14. Meh, oh well.
![]() I thought it was just a big fight club ala Meta over there anyway. |
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:18 AM
JCMach1 (25,901 posts)
15. boycott Reddit... that simple
easy for me, never used it anyway...
Does anyone here actually use it? |
Response to JCMach1 (Reply #15)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:22 AM
kentauros (29,414 posts)
20. I never used it, nor liked their "layout."
It looks too much like FreeRepublic in implementation (and commentary.)
|
Response to JCMach1 (Reply #15)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:23 AM
Dawgs (14,755 posts)
36. I visit it every day. The political discussion there is better than anything I've ever gotten on DU.
Sorry.
|
Response to Dawgs (Reply #36)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 12:24 AM
ronnie624 (5,764 posts)
90. Hogwash.
Sorry.
|
Response to ronnie624 (Reply #90)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 09:14 AM
Dawgs (14,755 posts)
99. You're right. Political discussion here is ALL political.
Discussion at Reddit is mostly on policy. Something that is non-existent here.
Thanks for helping me clarify. |
Response to JCMach1 (Reply #15)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 12:50 PM
madfloridian (88,114 posts)
69. I often link my DU posts to Reddit as well as my Twitter account.
I guess now Reddit is out of the question.
|
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Response to Name removed (Reply #17)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 12:13 PM
RebelOne (30,947 posts)
59. Drudge should be banned everywhere.
I visit only when I want my blood pressure to soar.
|
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:22 AM
geek tragedy (68,868 posts)
19. They banned Wikipedia but allow Foxnews (only banned nation.foxnews.com, not Fox itself)
Conservative jokers.
|
Response to geek tragedy (Reply #19)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 12:03 PM
Tuesday Afternoon (56,912 posts)
54. +1
Response to geek tragedy (Reply #19)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 08:15 PM
Jamaal510 (10,867 posts)
72. And FreeRepublic, apparently. eom
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:23 AM
Coyotl (15,262 posts)
22. All I can say is, "What's Reddit?"
Who needs aggregation when you have the real deal.
|
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:26 AM
Mr Dixon (1,185 posts)
23. IMO
WOW I never use that site anyway, DU will be fine and so will most of the other sites, glad to see INFOWARS made the list LOL.
|
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:30 AM
niyad (74,251 posts)
25. ah, the pajamahadeen strikes again. what an interesting list--noticed that rimjob's little site not
listed. heaven forfend that people should be exposed to intelligent, thoughtful, or even nutty, information. has anybody else noticed that reddit.com is on the list?
do I remember correctly that this is the same site that has a pro-porn group? |
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:36 AM
Pretzel_Warrior (8,361 posts)
28. That is their right.Looks like they are cleaning up the "noise"
And trying to focus on more reliable and objective news sources. Don't feel bad. Facebook and Amazon were also banned.
|
Response to Pretzel_Warrior (Reply #28)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:45 AM
Fumesucker (45,851 posts)
43. Yes, reliable and objective news sources like Fox, Free Republic and Red State
![]() |
Response to Pretzel_Warrior (Reply #28)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 12:20 PM
pa28 (6,145 posts)
61. Reliable and objective like Fox News?
Got it.
|
Response to Pretzel_Warrior (Reply #28)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 12:31 AM
ronnie624 (5,764 posts)
91. Those who run the site are obviously idiots and likely wingnuts.
But I don't feel "bad" in the least.
|
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:46 AM
rdking647 (4,669 posts)
31. i notice redstate and fthe freepers arent banned
what a crock of shit
|
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:53 AM
Ganja Ninja (15,953 posts)
33. They ban the onion too.
No sense of humor I guess.
But really who cares who they ban. |
Response to Ganja Ninja (Reply #33)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 12:02 PM
Spitfire of ATJ (32,723 posts)
53. Can't wait to see the Onion's reaction.
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:25 AM
Dawgs (14,755 posts)
37. Reddit should not be ignored.
It's a very popular site among younger people. And, /r/politics is very left leaning.
|
Response to Dawgs (Reply #37)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 09:00 PM
DJ13 (23,671 posts)
76. And, /r/politics is very left leaning.
Was, but can it stay left leaning with conservatives manipulating the sources used for discussion?
|
Response to DJ13 (Reply #76)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 09:11 AM
Dawgs (14,755 posts)
98. I don't know. :( n/t
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:27 AM
Dash87 (3,220 posts)
38. Maybe it's because they want news stories? It seems senseless to post
a link to a discussion forum on a discussion forum. That would be my guess.
|
Response to Dash87 (Reply #38)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 12:18 PM
starroute (12,977 posts)
60. But the list includes Raw Story, which does do news stories
I'll grant that most of the sites listed are discussion boards, aggregators, or magazines. But not all of them are. It looks more like an attempt to limit posts to the mainstream media -- but even that is kind of ridiculous in a politics subreddit.
I do read reddit on a regular basis. You can customize the way it displays so that you get the serious stuff and your own individual interests and leave out the juvenile tripe. I see that right now, there's only one story on my personal page from the politics subreddit -- something about Elizabeth Warren -- which suggests to me that cutting back on sources may affect its popularity. For whatever it's worth, other current posts there are from sources that include the New York Times, the Guardian, the Friendly Atheist blog, globalresearch.ca, Slate, Vanity Fair, ABC News, Talking Points Memo, the Washington Post, National Journal, The Hill, Daily Beast, MSNBC, and demos.org. That's a distinctly mixed bunch -- and one that seems to overlap heavily with the sources they did ban. All very strange. |
Response to Dash87 (Reply #38)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 04:31 AM
muriel_volestrangler (95,130 posts)
93. As the DK post says, Mother Jones won a Polk award for the '47%' video last year
And a MJ editor pointed out that National Review, on the opposite ideological side from them, had, in Robert Costa, some of the best original reporting on the shutdown.
Some of the sites can be justified as "doesn't produce significant original content" (including, it should be said, DU), but some of it looks like an ideological battle (the DK post shows how the most popular banned sites are nearly all left-leaning). |
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:28 AM
Blue_Tires (55,412 posts)
39. I think in retaliation DU should ban all discussion and posting
of photos related to secret upskirt shots of underage girls...
|
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:33 AM
Capt. Obvious (9,002 posts)
40. Are you happy now far left posters?
This is all your fault.
|
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:34 AM
Downwinder (12,869 posts)
41. Cull not, lest you be culled.
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:39 AM
MattSh (3,714 posts)
42. Well well well, what goes around comes around...
It wasn't all that long ago it seems that commenters here on DU were commenting on reddit banning rt.com as proof that RT was not a legitimate news source. But according to this list, RT is not banned and ranks higher than DU.
Maybe those on DU who commented on how the reddit ban proved that RT was not a legitimate news source can explain this. ![]() |
Response to MattSh (Reply #42)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:46 AM
Fumesucker (45,851 posts)
44. I'd forgotten that, good catch n/t
Response to MattSh (Reply #42)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 12:05 PM
geek tragedy (68,868 posts)
55. I don't recall that argument. I do recall the factual observation that RT is owned and operated
by Vladimir Putin's flunkies.
|
Response to MattSh (Reply #42)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 12:12 PM
KittyWampus (55,894 posts)
58. I read quite a few of the attempts to put lipstick on that pig… and Reddit wasn't used that I recall
and if it was, it sure wasn't by many.
|
Response to KittyWampus (Reply #58)
Thu Oct 31, 2013, 09:23 AM
MattSh (3,714 posts)
107. Try this link...
Response to MattSh (Reply #42)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 09:23 AM
L0oniX (31,493 posts)
100. The DU "kill the messenger" crowd runs wild sometimes.
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:50 AM
lumberjack_jeff (33,224 posts)
46. ... but not Free Republic or Conservative Cave. n/t
Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #46)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 09:00 PM
arikara (5,562 posts)
77. Conservative Cave?
Is there series a site named Conservative Cave?
LOL! |
Response to arikara (Reply #77)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:32 PM
Hissyspit (45,783 posts)
81. You have no idea...
how fucking stupid that place is.
Now they will do a whole discussion thread on this post. That's how fucking stupid it is. Seriesly. |
Response to Hissyspit (Reply #81)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 01:08 AM
arikara (5,562 posts)
92. I think I'll take a pass on checking it out
Freeperville was nauseating enough. But the name, its just so knuckle-draggingly visual.
![]() |
Response to arikara (Reply #92)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 03:52 PM
Hissyspit (45,783 posts)
104. It's whole purpose for existence is to make fun of posters on DU.
Yes, you read that correctly. That is it's whole raisin d'être. These people have nothing better to do with their lives. Really.
It really, really is THAT bad. As the other poster points out, it makes FR look a bastion of intellectualism. And now there will be a whole thread on this post about how STUPIDLY hypocritical I am to have looked at their website and commented on it here, or something like that. |
Response to arikara (Reply #92)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 04:33 PM
JHB (32,389 posts)
106. Let's just say that if you did checking it out, you'd be a statistically significant boost...
...to their usage.
|
Response to Hissyspit (Reply #81)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 05:00 AM
PCIntern (20,915 posts)
97. It makes FR look like
Oxford and Cambridge all rolled into one.
|
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:58 AM
Zorra (27,670 posts)
51. Maybe the PTB "bought" them. nt
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 12:05 PM
Ian_rd (2,124 posts)
56. Looks like a right wing censorship job disguised as "balance."
They've banned both "left" and "right" sources, but the right wing sources named tend to be unhinged conspiracy theory sites and those who fabricate news, while the lefter sites include those that produce undisputed journalism (like MJ).
Sneaky. But easily seen for what it is: Censorship of factual journalism that makes conservatives look bad. |
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 12:08 PM
KauaiK (544 posts)
57. Oh Wow....this is going to backfire
The first thought was I wonder WHO is behind this.
|
Response to KauaiK (Reply #57)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 12:35 PM
valerief (53,235 posts)
65. Someone with lots of $$$$$$. nt
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 12:23 PM
valerief (53,235 posts)
62. Wikipedia.org?????? nt
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 12:33 PM
pa28 (6,145 posts)
64. Wow, looks like a comprehensive censorship job on left wing opinion.
The moderation team must have been taken over by conservatives. Too bad.
|
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 12:35 PM
Puzzledtraveller (5,937 posts)
66. lawl
![]() |
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 12:36 PM
bemildred (90,061 posts)
67. Blog War comes to DU. nt
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 12:41 PM
Dopers_Greed (2,372 posts)
68. Did the Koch Brothers buy Reddit?
Like they did BuzzFeed.
|
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 01:08 PM
toby jo (1,269 posts)
70. This would be their 'outreach' to young voters - keepin ya stupid and ya don't even know it.
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 01:35 PM
DFab420 (2,464 posts)
71. reddit.com has a feedback email
It's the only contact to their headquarters I could find that seemed to be for public outreach..
feedback@reddit.com Let them know. |
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 08:30 PM
ismnotwasm (39,881 posts)
73. Alas
I shall simply have to continue my already redditless existence.
|
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 08:34 PM
Kaleva (26,617 posts)
75. Never heard of Reddit till I read the OP
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 09:13 PM
gopiscrap (21,473 posts)
78. how legit is that
seems odd to me that they would do that.
|
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:23 PM
LostOne4Ever (8,652 posts)
79. Every time I go to Reddit
Their layout makes me want to:
[center] ![]() |
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 10:29 PM
1000words (7,051 posts)
80. With the concept of objectivity in mind, I understand the decision.
Response to 1000words (Reply #80)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:51 PM
Rex (65,616 posts)
84. You think that is the reason?
They think we are just another echo chamber?
|
Response to Rex (Reply #84)
Tue Oct 29, 2013, 11:58 PM
1000words (7,051 posts)
85. Who knows, really? But if they want to use that as a reason, it is valid.
This site makes no bones about where its loyalties lay.
|
Response to Rex (Reply #84)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 12:08 AM
The Straight Story (48,121 posts)
86. No, it is really pretty simple
As I mentioned in another thread - most of our posts here link to other news outlets (local tv/paper/etc). Their idea is to limit the in between sites and only allow news reporting (to some extent).
I think they jumped the shark with more than a few of them, as do other folks there. But with reddit, anyone can just make their own subreddit and moderate it how they see fit. Someone already created /r/politic (versus r/politicS). I have my own subreddit there which I generally don't want others posting in (will be used for stories from our radio show). Have posted many stories here on DU I found on reddit and only link to the source and not reddit itself (unless it is an AMA or something). Linking to the reddit thread won't actually show the story but the comments and link (you post the title and link only there in general). |
Response to The Straight Story (Reply #86)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 12:14 AM
Rex (65,616 posts)
88. Okay thanks for explaining how reddit works.
That is one place I never really got into over the years. Yeah some of those sources raised my eyebrow and some that they left alone did too.
Hopefully they will adjust their filter if they get negative feedback. |
Response to Rex (Reply #88)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 12:22 AM
The Straight Story (48,121 posts)
89. One thing you should check out, and I love:
The I am A (whatever you are) ask me anything.
Lots of famous folks go on there (I got to ask Peter Mayhew some questions) but also avg folks. One I read tonight was: IamA Movie Theater Employee AMA! http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1ph5ir/iama_movie_theater_employee_ama/ (So you can see why one would link right to reddit in cases like that) More here and a list on the right side of upcoming ones (and yes, they do verify people before they can do an AMA) http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/ I can spend hours there.... |
Response to The Straight Story (Reply #86)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 10:13 AM
Eleanors38 (18,318 posts)
102. Did Reddit give an explanation for its bans, esp. regarding political sites like DU?
There was a posting here, and an Esquire article about the political "centrism" of younger people. Does this purge or ban seek to rid Reddit of sources which its main viewers consider "Bo-r-r-i-n-n-g" and irrelevant to its youth-oriented mission?
I read earlier this year an article in the alternative weekly Austin Chronicle where Reddit and other private sites were trying to become the new legitimizing forces for national discussion & policy, thereby replacing the diminishing roll of MSM. The Ask me Anything feature was mentioned, btw. |
Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #102)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 10:27 AM
The Straight Story (48,121 posts)
103. Well, again, this is just relevant to one subreddit out of many hundreds
and someone else already created a new subreddit for politics that does not ban any sources.
The whole idea was not to have people posting what they call blogspam - that is, loosely, when you post links to sites which the story didn't originate on and that are more focused on commentating on news stories (again, a somewhat loose definition). DU is not a news originator on most our posts. Others asked about freerepublic/etc - they didn't make the list most likely because no one used them anyway (the list has grown and changed over time). It is not that the banned sites are 'bad' they just weren't seen as news and more of commentary on the news. I don't agree with mods on it myself - the community can upvote/downvote themselves and don't need to be babysat. I can understand the logic, just not the heavy handed implementation. |
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 12:12 AM
TroglodyteScholar (5,477 posts)
87. Fuck those guys anyway
I've never spent a moment on Reddit that was worthwhile. And the same can probably be said of the people who use it every day.
|
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 04:52 AM
BootinUp (39,996 posts)
95. I don't care about Reddit. nt
Response to Oilwellian (Original post)
Wed Oct 30, 2013, 04:56 AM
mattclearing (10,071 posts)
96. Reddit is the gutter of the Internet.
Seriously, I'll take Alternet and Vice to Reddit, which is basically a comments section without journalism, anyday.
|