46
47

/r/ukpolitics now censoring the Daily Express? (i.imgur.com)

In-1985 が 投稿

全 196 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]TwattyMcSlagtits 33ポイント34ポイント  (19子コメント)

The Express is generally a shower of shit, but if we're restricting news that doesn't come from from 'reputable sources' I think we're going to struggle

[–]ToffeeAppleCiderUndecided 15ポイント16ポイント  (0子コメント)

Quite a few submissions recently have been Tweets, limited to 140 characters, no sources, and either half the words missing or pictures of words. So I'm surprised anything's restricted.

[–]Ashton187 4ポイント5ポイント  (17子コメント)

Compared to the mirror, the sun and the mail?

[–]simcar01 [スコア非表示]  (16子コメント)

or the Guardian, Independent, BBC, Sky News or Channel 4?

[–]Quagers [スコア非表示]  (15子コメント)

Yes, the Express is a shower of shit compared to them and the Times, the FT, the Economist, the Telegraph (although they are sliding), the Spectator and many others.

[–]EchoChambers4All [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

Come off it, the independent is basically buzzfeed nowadays, the rest are better though you're right.

[–]LolworthWe did it. 📎 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The independent is fucking terrible.

[–]lazerbulletWatermelon; limes and mangoes welcome 🌍 ☮ 🌻 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Also buzzfeed is good now.

[–]simcar01 [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

How much time did you spend with Channel 4 news in the last 12 months??

I know it isn't the "best" measure of editorial policy, but have a look at their FB page - their agenda is as blatant as the DM's is.

BBC and Sky are not as extreme - but they also favour a specific narrative, particularly when it comes to "opinion pieces".

[–]EchoChambers4All [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

I just agreed they were better than the independant/express, it wasn't resounding endorsement of them.

[–]simcar01 [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Fair enough - though I would probably dispute that Channel 4 is better than the Independent...

Of course what it does highlight is that "perception of bias" is a personal thing, not least of all because we are all biased anyway.

[–]Ed__Lib-Dem [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

It's not so much the bias as being simply false. Express and red tops can't be trusted at all.

[–]simcar01 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

t's not so much the bias as being simply false

Well that is clearly untrue. Even the Daily Sport was known to tell the truth occasionally.

Express and red tops can't be trusted at all.

Isn't it great that we have other news sources and the internet that we can use to verify articles then?

I personally don't trust any media source - because I know they all have an editorial bias. It would be quite worrying to think in this day and age anyone believes everything they read in any particular paper, or everything they see on any news channel.

[–]Samwasking [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

I'm just wondering what your broad political outlook is, I'm more left wing and have noticed both the Guardian and Telegraph plummet in quality over the last year and I wanted to know if someone more right or centrist also noticed this?

[–]Quagers [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Voted Tory in the last 2 elections and remain in the referendum, probably somewhere between Cameron and Liz Kendal politically (which some labour voters would have you belive is a wafer thin bracket).

I think the telegraph and indy have gone to shit, especially since the indy went online only. Guardian seems roughly unchanged to me.

[–]Ed__Lib-Dem [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It's slid but less than the other two

[–]Samwasking [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I'm really beginning to despair at the state of British journalism. Blatant sensationalism seems to be the baseline now, it might be confirmation bias on my par at this point it's hard to know but if there is as server a decline as I believe well that's worrying.

[–]simcar01 [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

My point is all media have their own narrative - it is down to people to see through the narrative and work out the truth.

So excluding certain media sources on the basis of their narrative, or agenda, is clearly stupid. You can't decide something is "wrong" or "shit" based on who tells you, you judge the article/comment/opinion on it's own merits.

So The Express is as able to print honest and relevant articles as any other paper - whether you think it does it less often than other sources is irrelevant. We should treat each media piece as a stand-alone. Sure, you can view it through the prism of the editorial policy, and you can use your opinion on their agenda to help you evaluate the content, but don't we do that anyway?

[–]Quagers [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

There is a difference between a media source having a narrative and the quality of its reporting being poor.

All media sources have a bias, the express however also has shocking editorial standards and highly misleading reporting. This isn't a left wing vs right wing source issue, there are plenty of good right wings news sources, but the Express is still a sack of shit.

[–]simcar01 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

But none of that takes away from the fact it can also tell the truth, does it?

We have seen on this sub the nature of the "better quality" press's editorial standards, and it isn't always great, is it? Opinion pieces being presented as facts, under misleading titles, isn't exclusive to The Express. One of the best things about the internet is we have access to all sorts of media, with all variety of opinions available to us. I don't see the validity in excluding one media source because a group of people don't like the editorial policy, or the quality of the reporting. If society goes down that route we will have state-controlled (or "reddit controlled) press... and that does not end well in anyone's view.

[–]HasuTerasLibDem 62ポイント63ポイント  (36子コメント)

Express was banned site-wide for vote manipulation a while back. Wouldnt be surprised if it were to do with that, and the fact it's shit.

[–]LaboeRechtsstaat über alles [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Express was banned site-wide for vote manipulation a while back

How does this work from a newspaper's PoV? How can they manipulate votes, are they using bots to upvote their stories or what?

[–]Awsumostraw PERSON. [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

You pay someone and ping you're on reddits front page and enjoying the clicks to your site.

[–]Lethal_Papercut 3ポイント4ポイント  (3子コメント)

And yet the Daily Mail is allowed, who have vote manipulation of their comments out the wazoo, to the point where it is pretty obvious they have a hand in it themselves.

[–]Quagers 24ポイント25ポイント  (2子コメント)

Its not about the comments on their own sites, but manipulation on Reddit that got them banned.

[–]TenFrio [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

They're clearly not banned anymore as that's mod-mail not a site message.

[–]fdsafdaw3f3acvsda-8.5, -8.72 SSP cybernat [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

/u/Quagers is replying to a comment that suggests the daily mail should also have been banned for vote manipulation because they manipulate the comment votes on their own site, not reddit. They aren't commenting on automoderator removing express posts.

[–]PsychoChomp [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Can you let me know where you heard that? I've not seen anything and tried to use reddits shitty search but got no where.

[–]Ivashkinpanem et circenses [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It was a site wide thing, unless you were modding sizable subs when it happened you wouldn't know about it.

[–]syuk😱 Izzardman 😱 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Coordinated shilling.

[–]TheFinalJourney [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

holy shit thats scandalous. i am completely behind that decision

[–]thornstarr🗳 Let's #LoseControl of our country! | Lib Dem | (-69, -420) [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Ha! Take that Murdoch/Dacre/Desmond (delete as appropriate).

I hope The Express is unbanned soon. I need to know what Diana would have thought about a Brexit.

[–]Ivashkinpanem et circenses[M] [スコア非表示]  (43子コメント)

This was me, I uploaded the wrong version of automod config whilst making some changes (I use a text editor with YAML syntax highlighting). Blame jetlag.

Still thinking of banning the papers content but this would be jumping the gun.

[–]LolworthWe did it. 📎 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

CONSPIRACY CONFIRMED LADS

[–]Awsumostraw PERSON. [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Pff, You say that, but how can we be sure you weren't involved in the conspiracy to kill princess Diana?

[–]Ivashkinpanem et circenses [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

We thought it was the only way to prevent Brexit.

[–]cboltandski [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Is it still banned then?

[–]Ewannnn [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

To create constructive discussion you need to start from a solid grounding. Tabloids most certainly are not that. Most threads from the Express get upvoted and the comments are just ridiculing the paper, what kind of discussion is this?

[–]In-1985[S] [スコア非表示]  (37子コメント)

Still thinking of banning it? What an utter fucking crock.

How do you justify banning a perfectly legitimate mainstream news source?

What's more, who appointed you arbiter of what is and isn't to be considered legitimate?

[–]Ivashkinpanem et circenses [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

...

[–]LtSlowTerrified of Theresa May [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I bet you'll ban hate speech and personal attacks next, you utter rule-nazi. CENSORSHIP. THIS IS WHY WE SHOULD HAVE NEVER LEFT THE /POL/ SAFESPACE

[–]KikariskaVoted Leave. Regret nothing [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

Calm down you cunt

[–]sulod [スコア非表示]  (23子コメント)

Calm down, lad.

I agree he shouldn't ban news sources, but going off on one doesn't help.

[–]In-1985[S] [スコア非表示]  (22子コメント)

I'm just sick to death of these lying, cheating, manipulating, left wing cunts.

Intellectual and moral vermin the lot of 'em.

[–]sulod [スコア非表示]  (15子コメント)

You're just giving them justification to ban you.

Delete your post before they see.

[–]In-1985[S] [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Fuck 'em, they're going to ban me anyway.

[–]Ivashkinpanem et circenses[M] [スコア非表示]  (13子コメント)

We see.

[–]In-1985[S] [スコア非表示]  (12子コメント)

Go on then, Ivashkin. We both know you're going to do it sooner or later, so it may as well be sooner.

[–]blue_dicecultural marxist as a pejorative [スコア非表示]  (11子コメント)

I think you need to calm down.

[–]In-1985[S] [スコア非表示]  (10子コメント)

I think you left wing arseholes need to stop downvoting me for stating the truth.

[–]TheDogeOfVenucci [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Oh my.

[–]SoyBeanExplosionLabour & Co-operative Party (-5.13, -3.03) [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

Intellectual and moral vermin the lot of 'em.

Whatever you say Mein Führer.

Perhaps we should arrange some kind of final solution to the problem posed by these "leftist vermin" you speak of?

[–]In-1985[S] [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

If only.

[–]blue_dicecultural marxist as a pejorative [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Lol. I think wishing genocide on lefties is just asking for a ban. Youd deserve it now.

[–]In-1985[S] [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

You'd do the same to people like me given half a chance, you know you would.

[–]LtSlowTerrified of Theresa May [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Hugh Whittow detected

[–]lazerbulletWatermelon; limes and mangoes welcome 🌍 ☮ 🌻 4ポイント5ポイント  (29子コメント)

Ivashkin did mention they were thinking about banning it a couple times. https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/4qqp2g/students_claim_they_are_too_depressed_by_brexit/d4v9gl2 https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/4qzssg/meta_could_it_please_become_required_to/

Did the other mods approve then /u/ivashkin ?

[–]sirobozne -2ポイント-1ポイント  (28子コメント)

/u/Ivashkin whoever you are, if you ban the Express you have to ban the Guardian, the Independent, the Daily Mail etc they are all shit but most are. Get a grip and unban it please.

[–]lazerbulletWatermelon; limes and mangoes welcome 🌍 ☮ 🌻 5ポイント6ポイント  (2子コメント)

Ivashkin whoever you are

Read the sidebar.

[–]sirobozne [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I'm on my phone and only really come on here on my phone.

[–]lazerbulletWatermelon; limes and mangoes welcome 🌍 ☮ 🌻 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Oh, right. They're a mod.

[–]HasuTerasLibDem [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Nah. But I would like to see the Canary.co and Another Angry Voice go as well. They're both dogshite.

[–]jackcuCorbynista 8ポイント9ポイント  (15子コメント)

Indie and DM, sure, but I think the guardian is hugely more reputable than those and the express.

[–]simcar01 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I take it you missed the "scoop" they ran on the "Brussels responding to Boris" last week then...

[–]ta50001 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Their frontpage at the moment- "Mama, will you be deported: Brexit vote triggers eruption of racism"

Not at all tabloidy.

[–]HaleornCardiff Central - Brexit Armageddon/WW3 Survivor [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Sigh, they really did used to do journalism you know. Seems like a while back though.

[–]ObjT [スコア非表示]  (11子コメント)

Guardian used to be good but it's gone downhill. No better in reputability than the others.

[–]Quagers [スコア非表示]  (9子コメント)

The Guardian absolutely is more reputable for news, a lot of people confuse the opinion columns or "Comment Is Free" with their factual reporting.

[–]ObjT [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I've seen plenty of items that are not marked 'opinion' that are disingenuous.

[–]hitch21 [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

Right at the top of their website right now:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/02/brexit-triggers-racism-climate-of-fear

Fair enough the comment is absolute drivel. But the news reporting is occasionally good but far from consistently good.

[–]Quagers [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

I see nothing wrong with that article? Seems like a fairly neutral look at a phenomenon which has occurred over the last week.

[–]hitch21 [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

Then you might be already in too deep

[–]Quagers [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

What exactly is wrong with it? The increase in racist incidents has been widely reported, this discusses the issue while bringing in some examples.

[–]Yeshuu [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

"A climate of fear affects lives but doesn’t register in statistics. Even so, by Friday, True Vision, the police-run site to combat hate crime, had recorded a fivefold increase in reports from the public, 331 incidents, since the day the referendum was held. Usually the weekly average is 63 reports.

Yet, while hate crime showed an 18% increase in 2014-15 from the year before, the annual crime survey suggests that such crime has fallen by 28% over the past seven years. So how do we keep a sense of perspective?"

Seems fine to me too. Uses stats, points out that over the last few years, stats on racism reporting have been falling but there has been a noticable spike in a certain area since the referendum result.

Not sure what /u/hitch21 has a problem with in all honesty. That said with an understanding that the Guardian is overtly and obviously left leaning.

[–]hitch21 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The national police chief said there was a rise from 63 reports per week on average to about 300 reports per week. Every report is horrible but there's 65 million people it's not a major problem and there's more articles written on it than incidents occurring. The message they want to get out at the Guardian is that leave is responsible for this. They have made they clear with their reporting for months.

[–]G51-Scot | Federalist | -2.53, 2.51 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The Guardian has gone so far downhill that all over their website they're now begging for donations.

[–]whitepalms85 [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

ban the Guardian, the Independent

If you ban those, then you also have to ban The Telegraph. The Telegraph is just the left wing version of The Guardian.

[–]sirobozne [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

Hence it's a slippery slope and nothing should be banned.

[–]Ivashkinpanem et circenses[M] [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

Plenty of things are, unless you think the Daily Stomer and it's ilk are a valuable source of content?

[–]sirobozne [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

If people don't like them they will be downvoted and no one will see them. And you can't compare the Daily Stomer with one of the biggest newspapers in the country can you?

[–]Ivashkinpanem et circenses[M] [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Well unfortunately that is not how things are. But, there is always a simple solution to these problems. Let the market decide!

[–]sirobozne [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

So you decide what people should see/upvote and what they shouldn't? I'd give the modding duties to someone else if I were you - you are letting your political views get in the way of being fair. Just because you personally don't like the Express shouldn't mean that others can't link it. You are being authoritarian and ridiculous.

[–]Ivashkinpanem et circenses [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

If you want neo-nazi sites to be allowed, put in a Reddit Request for r/gbpol.

[–]sirobozne [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

How many people link neo-nazi sites? Next to none I'd imagine. Ban Nazi's by all means but don't censor a genuine newspaper for god sake, use some common sense. In fact, why don't you ask the users if they will support a ban on the Express, rather than you make the decision?

[–]AnyalesAnyone seen a plan laying around anywhere? [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Not the EXPRESS how else will we be able to DISCUSS poorly researched NONSENSE?

The thing that had always SURPRISED me is then people actually READ the express in the FIRST place to be able to link a story FROM there.

Left wing conspiracy FTW!

[–]Orage38European [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

My guess is that the Express is just extremely unreliable, but I'm only guessing so I could be completely wrong. If there's a noteworthy Express article the chances are that it can be found on another site/in another newspaper, except that other site will likely be more objective and thorough in its reporting. Regarding your article, you can find it on the Telegraph here. Feel free to post it to the subreddit.

[–]DarkSayedVoted Leave | Hates the Guardian [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

If you try to make this into /r/UK, we'll just start again somewhere else.

[–]IFeelRomantic [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Anyone else tired of, whenever anything even vaguely right-wing is removed or banned, some people immediately crying censorship?

[–]Awsumostraw PERSON. [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

The Express had previously been banned (Reddit wide) for vote manipulation.

[–]TangoJager [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Why not do something like /r/Futurology, where each source has a colored dot corresponding to a "reputation level" ?

[–]RewardedFoolI agree with Nick 2ポイント3ポイント  (11子コメント)

They remove the express but allow Order-Order? What is the world coming to?

[–]ta50001 9ポイント10ポイント  (10子コメント)

Guido regularly breaks stories. None of you were complaining when he was the only one covering the Lucy Allen bullying stories, or Theresa May's team getting the Telegraph to delete an unflattering article.

[–]RewardedFoolI agree with Nick 6ポイント7ポイント  (9子コメント)

I've always hated the Paul Staines propaganda blog. He doesn't serve any purpose at all and just spreads hate and fear though a series of misleading headlines and even more misleading articles.

He serves no purpose, the word did not need to know that William Hague shared a twin room with a special adviser who turned out to be gay. The word did not need someone complaining that Sadiq Khan is an extremist because he emailed his Imam.

By "Breaks stories" you mean that he publishes an hour before real journalists publish, because he has no ethical or journalistic standards to uphold, no editing process. Nothing.

He's a lot worse than The Express.

[–]ta50001 [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

He serves no purpose, the word did not need to know that William Hague shared a twin room with a special adviser who turned out to be gay. The word did not need someone complaining that Sadiq Khan is an extremist because he emailed his Imam

Who are you to determine this?

Again, just two days ago, he revealed that Theresa May leaned on the Telegraph to delete a story about her. Are you saying you'd rather not know about that?

[–]RewardedFoolI agree with Nick [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

You need that in your life do you?

Did you read the statement Hague had to put forward? Nobody should have to do that, nobody should have to go into so much detail about their marriage and miscarriages.

How many times has your wife miscarried? Have you ever shared a twin room with a man because it was cheaper?

He only runs smear campaigns, that's all he does. The world does not need a lying homophobe with an islamophobic bent publicised on forums to be revered by morons like you. If you get rid of The Express then you need to get rid of the publications that are worse as well.

[–]ta50001 [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

I'm not going to take you seriously when you use miscarriages as an argument tactic.

You need that in your life do you?

Yes, I'd like to know what associations senior politicians have with extremists, I don't know why we all wouldn't want to know that, and no other publication was willing to touch it.

He only runs smear campaigns, that's all he does

Except that's complete bullshit, I just gave you two examples which weren't smear campaigns and which we'd be poorer for not knowing.

The world does not need a lying homophobe with an islamophobic bent publicised on forums to be revered by morons like you

Ah, there it is, you disagree with his politics, and that's why you'd rather not have him exist. Not because of """"journalistic standards""""

[–]RewardedFoolI agree with Nick [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

Except that's complete bullshit, I just gave you two examples which weren't smear campaigns and which we'd be poorer for not knowing.

We'd not be any worse off at all. The Journalist who wrote the article could have put it up somewhere else very easily, it wasn't a big scoop at all.

Re. Lucy Allen, it wasn't a national interest story at all, she's a backbencher who shouted at staff members.

Ah, there it is, you disagree with his politics

Homophobia isn't really "his politics". I don't give a fuck about how right wing he is, I care about how little respect he has for other human beings and how much of a general cunt he is.

[–]ta50001 [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

We'd not be any worse off at all. The Journalist who wrote the article could have put it up somewhere else very easily, it wasn't a big scoop at all

But the story that May leaned on the Telegraph didn't appear anywhere else, so you're wrong.

Re. Lucy Allen, it wasn't a national interest story at all, she's a backbencher who shouted at staff members.

It was all over this sub though, so it mattered to some people. So you're now saying that stories which don't have "national appeal" aren't important?

[–]RewardedFoolI agree with Nick [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

But the story that May leaned on the Telegraph didn't appear anywhere else, so you're wrong.

Because Staines paid the most.

It's very easy to put it up yourself and there are hundreds of political bloggers. I'm not wrong.

It was all over this sub though, so it mattered to some people. So you're now saying that stories which don't have "national appeal" aren't important?

People cared because there wasn't much other stuff to get outraged about. It was one of the many things that very few people in the country cared about at all, it barely made the news even in the "left wing media".

Back to journalistic standards, the site is based in Nevis so that people cannot afford to sue him for libel, that allows him to make shit up at an alarming pace.

[–]ta50001 [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Because Staines paid the most.

Publication pays for source shocker

It's very easy to put it up yourself and there are hundreds of political bloggers. I'm not wrong.

But how can you be sure that it'd appear elsewhere? Are there any other rumour blogs that would publish something like that?

It was one of the many things that very few people in the country cared about at all, it barely made the news even in the "left wing media".

So you're saying that a UK politics sub isn't interested in affairs concerning backbenchers? So then why was this sub interested in it?

Seriously, what point are you trying to make? That it's not national so none of us should care? Well we do care, and there's evidence that we do care, and if you don't then that's fine, nobody's forcing you to participate, but don't attack the source just because you're butthurt about his politics.

Back to journalistic standards, the site is based in Nevis so that people cannot afford to sue him for libel, that allows him to make shit up at an alarming pace.

Or it allows him to publish stories other sites can't.

[–]Jim_Nash [スコア非表示]  (9子コメント)

As noted below, this was a mistake. But when mods start trying to push their own agenda it never has positive consequences for the forum in question. I've seen profitable forums destroyed by aggressive moderation, with the site owners not realising what hit them.

So in case anyone is thinking about banning this or that source because it's "full of lies", or to put it more accurately "it doesn't reflect my ideology", it's worth reflecting on the fact that it just doesn't work in the long run. Yeah, you get to feel all big and important. But you don't change people's minds by censoring them. You only push them underground, where they grow.

[–]Ivashkinpanem et circenses [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

Please do note, if I was to ban everything that went against what I thought was good content or matched my ideological views this sub would be a very different place.

[–]In-1985[S] [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

It's not your place to ban anything. Your job is to moderate, not edit.

[–]Ivashkinpanem et circenses[M] [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

This isn't a job.

[–]Jim_Nash [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

That's a rather semantic response. Paid job or otherwise, a mod's remit is to enforce the rules. Depending on his place in the structure it may also be extendable to basically creating an echo chamber of his own opinions, but again, that's carries a lot of obvious risks of alienating people and killing the thing.

It's also pretty naff of a moderator to express a contemptuous opinion of a member, as per the exchange with In-1985 below. Maybe these are bizarre Reddit conventions I'm not up to speed with.

[–]In-1985[S] [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

What is it then?

[–]Ivashkinpanem et circenses [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

Honestly? Something I do for fun. I genuinely like building systems and communities.

[–]In-1985[S] [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Just not communities that include people like me, right?

[–]Ivashkinpanem et circenses [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Definitely not people like you.

[–]sirobozne -4ポイント-3ポイント  (18子コメント)

What are the mods doing? They don't actively moderate the subreddit but they think it's appropriate to ban certain newspaper's articles from being linked? Pathetic.

[–]Yellowbenzenehello.jpg 8ポイント9ポイント  (7子コメント)

It's a site level ban of the express domain for manipulation of votes to direct traffic to their pages.

[–]sirobozne 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

It wasn't banned yesterday though was it?

[–]In-1985[S] [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

No it isn't. It's a sub-level ban administered by automod, configured to do so by this sub's moderators.

Please be quiet if you don't know what you're talking about.

[–]lazerbulletWatermelon; limes and mangoes welcome 🌍 ☮ 🌻 [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

Please be quiet if you don't know what you're talking about.

What a fantastic way to have a discussion.

[–]Yellowbenzenehello.jpg [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

We really need to watch ourselves with all these tough right-wingers about.

[–]AnyalesAnyone seen a plan laying around anywhere? [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Now you play nice with the snowflake right

[–]Yellowbenzenehello.jpg [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

That's me told, thanks tough guy 😘

Anyway - https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/1d9p9i/why_is_the_daily_express_banned_from_reddit/

[–]Quagers 0ポイント1ポイント  (9子コメント)

They definitely do actively mod, I have absolutely no idea where you got that idea from.

[–]sirobozne 3ポイント4ポイント  (8子コメント)

The constant double or triple posts of exactly the same article or the same subject give me the idea that they don't moderate actively, I was told by someone a while ago that this was the reason (which is fine btw). Why have they decided that the Express should be banned?

[–]fdsafdaw3f3acvsda-8.5, -8.72 SSP cybernat [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

I regularly report editorialised headlines and see them removed. I point out duplicates too, but most of the time the people who posted them just delete them.

[–]Ivashkinpanem et circenses[M] [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

There is no easy way to detect duplicate posts. Some are manually removed, but many are just downvoted and never see the front page.

However, we need users to help by reporting and downvoting duplicates (and by duplicates I mean the same link rather than different papers reporting on the same thing).

[–]fdsafdaw3f3acvsda-8.5, -8.72 SSP cybernat [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

I was thinking about this earlier, but since I've never used automoderator I don't actually know if it's possible or how well it'd work.

I was looking at automod's documentation and saw that it could pull the embedded title, could you have auto mod checking the embedded title and then see if there's other posts with exact the same title?

Using the same feature, would it be possible to give automod a list of sources that consistently use embedded titles, have it check the embedded title against the submitted title and then either post a comment or send a message pointing out the no editorialising headlines rule (but not automatically removing it).

another idea

Or you could give it a list of sources that regularly see duplicate submissions and the corresponding URLs so it can flag dupes that don't have identical URLs. (ie, gu.com, theguardian.com and theguardian.co.uk)?

No idea if any of these are feasible, just throwing them out there.

[–]Ivashkinpanem et circenses [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

It doesn't have a DB, it just runs every submission and comment through a list of rules we write. The only way around this would be to have a bot which scans every submission and automatically adds the URL to the list of blocked links for say 2 weeks, then removes it from the config.

[–]Quagers 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

I'm not a mod btw.

They definitely do actively mod but its fairly light touch, they tend to do a good job of removing shit posts, brigadeing and outright hate speech. Personally I think they do a pretty good job.

[–]sirobozne -1ポイント0ポイント  (2子コメント)

Hardly a light touch when they have started banning certain newspapers is it? If people don't like the Express' articles, they don't have to read them do they? Banning it screams of censorship and this could start a slippery slope, if this is banned I can think of 5 or 6 papers that should be banned.

[–]Quagers [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

The Express was banned site wide for vote manipulation using bots, probably linked to that.

https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/1d9p9i/why_is_the_daily_express_banned_from_reddit/

[–]RewardedFoolI agree with Nick [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

3 years ago though.

People in that thread are saying that a reddit message pops up with the reason why even when they put an express link in a private sub.

If it's the automoderator message pictured then it's a different thing entirely.

[–]NGD80 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Can we also censor the BBC, you know, just for balance?

[–]motiv999Back in control [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

Terrible decision if true. All it really shows is a degree of immaturity from the mods.
The Express is no worse than the sun, mirror or star. I can only presume it is banned because the moderation team voted a certain way in a certain referendum and have hit out at a paper that supported a different view to their own.
Shameful really.

[–]The_Irish_SeaTime to learn French and renounce my citizenship [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

Something to do with vote manipulation? Still, odd timing.