Today Michael Brown posted an article complaining that CNN is being unfair in its coverage of Donald Trump. Of course, I had to reply. As if this writing, my response elicited replies from three individuals, all clearly Trump supporters and presumably conservative Christians. Each of my replies was clear, concise, and professional. In one of my comments, I responded by asking one of these individuals to define the term “MSM” (i.e. “Mainstream Media”). This is the first part of his response:
Minimal Standards Media .
More Salacious Media.
Most Slanderous Media.
Mistaken Suggestive Media.
Myopic Shameful Media.
Multiple Scams Media.
Malodorous Stinky Media.
Misguided Shallow Media.
Misdirected Sentiment Media.
Mean Spirited Media .
Initially, I was inclined to give up at this point. But instead, I decided to take the first of his “definitions” and challenge him on it. To be sure, at this point I had little hope of persuading this individual of anything. But perhaps, just perhaps, my interaction with this individual and in particular my insistence on clear definitions and evidential defenses would plant a seed in somebody. So I wrote the following:
Let’s take your first acronym: “Minimal standards media.”
Please provide objective evidence that the standard institutional exemplars of the “MSM” label (i.e. CNN; New York Times; Washington Post; Pro Publica) exemplify inferior journalistic standards to the journalists at Fox News.
I’ll get you started. Here’s the New York Times statement on Journalistic Standards and Ethics:
Other major organizations have similar public statements. Please provide evidence that their standards are inferior to Fox’s and/or that they are less successful at maintaining their standards than is Fox News.
But then, when I tried to post the comment this disclaimer came up:
Hold on, this is waiting to be approved by The Stream.
I thought, perhaps the inclusion of any link is sufficient to require webmaster approval. However, within ten minutes, the comment was deleted.
I tried posting an additional post (with no embedded link) but it too was placed in a queue for approval. Apparently, all my comments now require approval. It has now been 1 1/2 hours and my comment is still not posted.
It appears that I have been silenced simply because I challenged Donald Trump and asked his supporters to provide evidence for their sweeping indictments of “mainstream media”.
The Stream states on its “About Us” section the following: “In an age when people of faith are isolated in silos and marginalized from the public square, The Stream breaks down the false divides between the sacred and profane, between faith and reason.” (source)
Wait, The Stream claims to believe silos are a bad thing?!
Needless to say, the hypocrisy is glaring when a website that exists to oppose alleged bias in the mainstream media then silences dissenting voices on its own platform simply for expressing that dissent.
In closing, I want to stress that I have absolutely no reason to think Michael Brown has any involvement in silencing my voice. (No doubt he has better things to do on a Saturday night!) But this modus operandi does reflect very poorly on The Stream.