The history of HuffPost's moderation of user comments on its news story threads

... ..

SUMMARY

• MAY 2005 - OCTOBER 2007: HuffPost apparently post-moderated user comments on its news threads. This means that all comments submitted were published as-is, in real time. During this period, HuffPost only removed comments after-the-fact, (supposedly) according to its Comment Policy and FAQ: Comments & Moderation.
  
  
• OCTOBER 2007: HuffPost began some form of pre-moderating comments on its news threads. It posted an indicator at the top of each of these threads as to how many comments were "pending" (being reviewed, and awaiting approval for publication --- or rejection).
  

  Despite the above, HuffPost's Comment Policy, etc., continued to state that it post-moderates comments on its news threads.

• MARCH 2008: HuffPost announced that it had begun formally pre-moderating all comments on its news threads. It posted an indicator at the top of each of these threads as to how many comments were "pending" (being reviewed, and awaiting approval for publication - or rejection). It also posted two notices in the same region: (1) “All comments are moderated by 15 real-humans 24/7; approved comments are published to our site very quickly, but not always instantly!” (2) “Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.”.

  Despite the above, HuffPost's Comment Policy, etc., continued to falsely state that it post-moderates comments on its news threads.

• JULY 2008: Arianna Huffington publicly announced that HuffPost's biggest mistake was not pre-moderating comments on news threads since its opening (in May 2005) --- but that "We eventually decided that it was worth the substantial effort and expense to have human pre-moderation on both blogs and news."
  
  HuffPost also placed notices in each comment-submission entry box stating "All comments are moderated." Further, it placed notices atop all submitted comments, stating "This comment is pending approval and won't be displayed until it is approved."
  

  Despite the above, HuffPost's Comment Policy, etc. continues to falsely state to this day* that it post-moderates comments on its news threads. (*See end of this article, "Conclusion", and "Nov. 20, 2009 Addendum")

• JULY 2010: "Huffington credits her decision early on to moderate comments and keep things civil rather than allowing the typical Internet free-for-all. It’s a lot of work—HuffPo has 20 people who do nothing but weed out the nasties." (Newsweek interview)

  
  

The significance of the above facts is that HuffPost has clearly tried to have it both ways:

• When various media outlets have revealed the outrageous user comments that appear on HuffPost's news threads, its default excuse/claim is that as soon as it discovered them, they were promptly removed; that with the volume of comments submitted, there are bound to be "a few" that slip through in error.
  
  
• Yet right on HuffPost's news threads --- and in its public statements --- it claims that comments appearing on its news threads are there only because it has reviewed, approved and made the decision to publish them. This was the case in some form since October 2007. And as the proof in this article demonstrates, it was definitely the case since March 2008.
  

One way or another, the truth of this matter will eventually come out. For as Ms. Huffington herself has often said, it is futile to try to conceal important truths in the age of the Internet, and of vigilant citizen journalism.

It is Huff-Watch's hope that this detailed article will make a contribution to definitively establishing the truth of HuffPost's moderation of user comments on its news threads.

QUICK GRAPHIC SUMMARY

The fastest, best way to gain an introductory understanding of this reality is to review what HuffPost's own news threads have looked like through time --- because its own statements upon them (and as we'll see shortly, in its public announcements) reveal the truth.

The graphical summary below (click to enlarge) provides the newcomer with a quick-reference timeline of the evolution of HuffPost's moderation of news threads. It illustrates the fact that HuffPost implemented major changes soon after major public eruptions over its users letting loose with their hatre-speech, urgings of violence against protectees of the U.S. Secret Service, etc.

===========================================================

THE CHRONOLOGY - TABLE OF CONTENTS
(Pivotal events in red)

===========================================================

(1) MAY 2005: (HuffPost debut) through October 2007: Post-moderation

(2) SEPTEMBER 2007: The Media Research Center issued report describing HuffPost as a facilitator for leftist hate speech --- contrary to its stated principles and policies

(3) OCTOBER 2007: HuffPost began pre-moderating comments on news threads in some fashion

(4) JANUARY 2008: HuffPost news thread shows massive backlog of comments "pending" its review

(5) MARCH 1, 2008: After another public eruption over hateful user comments on its news threads, HuffPost announced --- in multiple ways --- that all news threads would be pre-moderated from then on

(6) MARCH 20, 2008: Ms. Huffington lashed out at an "O'Reilly Factor" producer, and speculated that this might all be a right-wing conspiracy

(7) JULY 29, 2008: Ms. Huffington claimed that HuffPost's biggest mistake was not pre-moderating comments on news threads since day one --- but that it decided it "is worth the substantial effort and expense" to do so

(8) DECEMBER 2008: HuffPost had up to or more than 1,000 comments "pending" its approval on its news threads concerning the Gaza conflict

CONCLUSION

ADDENDUM ITEMS: Further proving the fact that HuffPost: (1) is and has been pre-moderating all user comments on its news threads; (2) continues to publicly claim it is only "post-moderating" them; (3) is and has been applying a discriminatory standard of moderation, in violation of its own Comment Policy

===============================

(1) MAY 2005 (HuffPost debut) through October 2007: Post-moderation

===============================

During this period, there was no statement on HuffPost's news threads as to how it moderated them (except providing links to its Comment Policy, etc.).

February 27 - March 1, 2007: The "Cheney Thread"

In summary, on February 27, 2007, the Taliban failed in its attempt to assassinate Vice President Cheney during his visit to Afghanistan. HuffPost put up the story of this event as its top news thread. Many of its resident hard-leftists expressed their regret that the Taliban was unsuccessful, and how much better the world would be if someone would murder Cheney.

The only physical evidence of the comments that appeared on this HuffPost thread is found at Michelle Malkin's site, here (story here).

Within hours, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and others were all over HuffPost for this outrage --- and the fact that it then claimed that there were only a "miniscule minority" of "clearly unhinged, fringe" users who put up "offensive" comments, which its moderators then removed. The PDF of that thread proves the facts. This episode was also covered in detail at other blogsites, including TownHall (Dean Barnett), and in significant detail at JonQuixoteWorld, here.

Several days later, Ms. Huffington lashed out at her critics in a blog article she wrote for HuffPost. Excerpts (emphasis added):

A miniscule portion of the people who read that story chose to take advantage of the anonymous, open forum nature of comments in our news section to express regret that the Vice President hadn't been killed in the attack.

As soon as these offensive comments came to our attention, they were deleted from the site.
[…]

No one at HuffPost is defending these comments -- they are unacceptable and were treated as such by being removed. They were not made by me, by our editors, or by our bloggers. They were made by anonymous visitors to the site -- visitors that make up a very, very small unrepresentative portion of our readers."

So, please, spare us the bogus indignation. And stop trying to build an illogical but politically-convenient thesis on the backs of a few unhinged and clearly fringe commenters.

The reality of the situation --- in contrast to Ms. Huffington's statements --- was proven by the actual thread, and blog analysis of HuffPost's actions concerning it. Little Green Footballs provided the most concise debunking of the obfuscations HuffPost put forth (emphasis added):

The simple fact is that Arianna Huffington deleted hundreds of those comments about Dick Cheney, and when another topic about Cheney was posted there, the exact same thing happened again.

===============================

(2) SEPTEMBER 2007: The Media Research Center issued report describing HuffPost as a facilitator for leftist hate speech --- contrary to its stated principles and policies

===============================

In September 2007, the Media Research Center published a report, "Huffington's House Of Horrors," detailing how HuffPost was becoming a locus of radical leftist hate speech --- in contrast to its statements about itself, its moderation practices, etc.

===============================

(3) OCTOBER 2007: HuffPost began pre-moderating comments on news threads in some fashion

===============================

The below screen excerpt was captured from an October 22, 2007 HuffPost news thread, showing that while 926 comments had been posted, 0 comments were "pending," meaning they were waiting for HuffPost approval.


The full page from which this excerpt is derived is shown below:

===============================

(4) JANUARY 2008: HuffPost news thread showed massive backlog of comments "pending" its review

===============================

On January 23, 2008, HuffPost's top news thread was entitled Gazans Flood Egypt After Border Breach. As is indicated at this story link (and PDFs, below), HuffPost published this story, sourced through the AP, at 6:17pm.

The following PDF excerpts of this thread, captured 23 minutes later, at 6:40pm (see time-stamps at lower right corner of pages), show that while 16 comments were published to the thread, 175 were "pending" (page 2) --- meaning that they were being reviewed by HuffPost, which would approve and publish them, or reject them.


Some users began complaining about the fact that HuffPost was preventing their comments from appearing, and the massive backlog of comments that were "pending" its review. Examples:

LanceThruster
169 comments pending and not a single one posted? Do the Zionists have to filter out all uncomfortable information about their brutalization of the Palestinians to make it fit for mass consumption?
Reply | posted 03:43 pm on 01/23/2008

Note: HuffPost has left "LanceThruster" still active as of December 2009, right; also note his screed about HuffPost's censorship of anti-Israel comments (which is a joke; see: Archiveof anti-Israel, ant-Semitic bias, libels and hate at HuffPost.)

hope4theflowers
this isnt a blog,this is a news story..why do you need to approve these comments? Can you be any more fascist ??
Reply | posted 04:41 pm on 01/23/2008

(reply)
NicoleAnonymous
They censure people here all the time. It drives me crazy.[...]
Reply | Parent | posted 06:10 pm on 01/23/2008

hope4theflowers
whats taking you so long to post our comments Huffpo?I can see over 180 pending.... what are you doing all this time..weeding out the comments that criticize Israel?
Reply | posted 04:38 pm on 01/23/2008

ptarantino
I don't like to believe in the Jewish mob running the media, but how in the hell does no open comments appear for this article?
Whereas they are working for all the others.
WTF Huffingtonpos
Reply | posted 04:36 pm on 01/23/2008

Note: HuffPost has left "ptarantino" still active as of December 2009, right:

holidaze07
You can't allow all the anti-Jewish posts can you Huffington?
Reply | posted 04:24 pm on 01/23/2008

The above is proof positive that HuffPost was pre-moderating user comments, to some degree, as of January 2008.

UPDATE, December 2009: Now that we've learned of and have started using DocStoc, here are the links to some of the PDFs we've amassed that contain the above comments and more --- so you can see for yourself what was occurring on this thread:

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/20054785/23Jan08-GazaThread-630pm-16-posted-175-pending

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/20054816/23Jan08-GazaThread-1100pm-others-complaining

===============================

(5) MARCH 1, 2008: After another public eruption over hateful user comments on its news threads, HuffPost announced --- in multiple ways --- that all news threads would be pre-moderated from then on

===============================

On February 16, former First Lady Nancy Reagan fell in her California home, and was hospitalized. Initial fears were that she’d broken her hip, but tests proved that she had not.

On February 17, HuffPost put up a news thread dedicated to this subject, as a story near the top of its front page. If you follow that link, however, you’ll see that HuffPost management has thrown all comments posted to this thread “down the memory hole” (Internet parlance for attempting to remove all evidence of postings; see the “Cheney thread” for precedent).

As on the “Cheney thread,” HuffPost's hard-leftists to unleashed their hateful fury and death wishes --- this time, against an elderly former First Lady in ill health. Bill O’Reilly described what happened at HuffPost in an article he entitled “Hate Speech And The ‘Net.”

The difference this time, however, was that unlike the "Cheney thread" incident, for approximately 5 months (since October 2007) HuffPost had been at least partially pre-moderating its news threads.

As before, however, Ms. Huffington lashed out at her critics, claiming in a late-February interview with Conde Naste Portfolio:

(A) few ugly - and anonymously posted -- comments appear(ed) on HuffPost, which were removed as soon as we become aware of them (…)

Apparently, this latest public exposure of the reality of hate speech at HuffPost prompted the site to formally begin pre-moderating its news threads --- an action it announced in the following days, in multiple venues.

On March 1, 2008, HuffPost's news threads changed in a fundamental way --- and its users took note. Specifically, a new notice appeared on each thread, which read (emphasis added):

“All comments are moderated by 15 real-humans 24/7; approved comments are published to our site very quickly, but not always instantly!”

“Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to”

The following is an excerpt from a PDF taken of a thread on March 1, showing this notice (click to enlarge):


Below is the full page from which the above excerpt is derived (click to enlarge):


HuffPost users immediately began to complain about how long it was taking for their comments to appear. Apparently, the volume of complaint emails HuffPost received concerning this delay prompted its Community Manager, Chrissie Brodigan, to address this issue in her debut blog articles:

HuffPost's Community Manager articulates the site's new policy: Pre-moderation of user comments on all news threads

On February 28, 2008, Ms. Brodigan introduced herself via a blog article, and stated that HuffPost then had 15 moderators:

[NOTE: For unknown reasons, HuffPost removed the above article from its site; it was located here --- but ironically, it left the comments up. Oops!!!]

On March 3, 2008, Ms. Brodigan directly addressed HuffPost's embarrassments over the O'Reilly eruption re Nancy Reagan, and announced that HuffPost was about to begin pre-moderating comments on all news threads (emphasis added):

Bill O'Reilly's report on HuffPost community gave me heartburn and a headache and likely aged me by at least 5 years.(…) We unfortunately did not pre-moderate comments around former first lady Nancy Reagan's fall. As a result, some of the most awful, hateful commentary emerged around that article, and we weren't aware of the meanness that had seeped through, until it was just too late.

As you can imagine the really un-fun part of my job came to dominate conversations for two days. A small amount of community members can do a lot of damage…(…)

(C)urrently, all blogs are pre-moderated (by those mythical 15 real humans alluded to in the credits), but all news stories are not pre-moderated by default (hint: things will be changing).

[NOTE: As before, for unknown reasons, HuffPost removed the above article from its site; it was located here --- but ironically, it left the comments up. Oops!!!]

On March 4, 2008, Ms. Brodigan announced via a blog article (below), that in response to many user inquiries re delayed comment posting, HuffPost's goal was to "publish approved comments" on its news threads "within 8-10 minutes..." and that the site had "just added three new moderators"... bringing the total number of moderators to 18.

[NOTE: As before, for unknown reasons, HuffPost removed the above article from its site; it was located here--- but ironically, it left the comments up. Oops!!!]

[NOTE: As will be documented on this blogsite, at the same time HuffPost implemented this radical change --- from post-moderating comments on its news threads, to pre-moderating them --- a wide variety of Jew-bashing and slanderously anti-Israel comments appeared on a news thread dealing with the conflict in the Gaza Strip. Shortly thereafter, HuffPost removed every comment from this thread, then shut the thread down to new comments altogether.]

On April 8, 2008, Ms. Brodigan stated in an email to a user, who had been sending her repeated examples of certain users' pathological violations of HuffPost's Comment Policy and Terms of Service, the following --- that HuffPost recently:

• "went into 'full moderation' causing massive backlogs of traffic"
  
  
• "(started) spending an insane amount of money on moderation"

===============================

(6) MARCH 20, 2008: Ms. Huffington lashed out at an "O'Reilly Factor" producer, and speculated that this might all be a right-wing conspiracy

===============================

The following video shows what happened when Ms. Huffington was approached by a producer of "The O'Reilly Factor," when he asked why hard-leftist hate comments against Nancy Reagan were still published at HuffPost --- a month after the site claimed that they were all taken down:

The following day, Ms. Huffington again lashed out at her critics (specifically O'Reilly), in a blog article (emphasis added):

HuffPost gets around 500,000 comments a month. These comments are anonymous and in no way represent my opinions, or the opinions of HuffPost or our bloggers. We have a zero tolerance policy when it comes to abusive or hateful language or comments – such comments are taken down as quickly as they come to the attention of our moderators.

And we are constantly working to develop new technologies -- and backing them up with more and more 24/7 moderators -- which will allow us to more effectively filter out objectionable comments. But no system is perfect and offensive comments occasionally slip through -- on our site and any place else on the Internet that encourages a free and open exchange of ideas.

Let me be as clear as possible. We find the kind of toxic comments O'Reilly is pointing out utterly repugnant and take them down. Period. But we refuse to let the vile actions of a miniscule number of anonymous, trouble-making trolls force us to shut down our comments section* […]

[*NOTE: In fact, as other evidence on this blog will prove, HuffPost had, by this time, made it a practice of shutting down comments on news threads --- including those regarding the illnesses/deaths of prominent non-leftists, and even its 2007 "Happy New Year from HuffPost" thread. See the documentation detailing this false statement by Ms. Huffington, here.]

And as in earlier instances (discussed elsewhere on this blog), Ms. Huffington resorted to personal attacks and conspiracy theories to lash out at O'Reilly (and by default, against anyone who dares to expose the reality of HuffPost's "fringe, unhinged" leftists):

(O’Reilly) spews hate as readily as he breathes. It's his lifeblood. In fact, it wouldn't surprise me if O'Reilly had one of his staffers put these offensive comments up on HuffPost, just so he could have something to rail against.

This is ironic, given the fact that barely three months earlier, Ms. Huffington published an article in which she lambasted Republican presidential contender Mike Huckabee for "blaming the messenger":

It has exposed the dissembling reality behind the charming, articulate, more-preacher-than politician facade - and has called into question both his judgment and his integrity. Huckabee's response has been to fudge the truth, point the finger at everyone in sight, and -- that old standby -- blame the messenger.

From this point on, HuffPost made it known that it was pre-moderating its news threads, particularly those that appear at the top of its front page, which is where the vast majority of commenting activity is focused.

===============================

(7) JULY 29, 2008: Ms. Huffington claimed that HuffPost's biggest mistake was not pre-moderating comments on news threads since day one --- but that it decided it "is worth the substantial effort and expense" to do so

===============================

In a July 2008 interview with PoynterOnline (the webzine for the Poynter Institute, a Florida-based journalism school), Ms. Huffington was asked:

(Q) What's been the Huffington Post's biggest mistake and what would you have done differently?

Huffington: From the beginning, I would have established a policy of pre-moderating all comments on the site. We started with pre-moderation only on blog posts, since we felt it was important to provide a civil environment for our bloggers (i.e., one where critical comments would of course be allowed but no ad hominem attacks or name calling). Our comments on the news site were originally post-moderated (i.e., objectionable comments were removed only after our moderators were alerted). We eventually decided that it was worth the substantial effort and expense to have human pre-moderation on both blogs and news.

Here is a screen capture of this important quote from the article:

===============================

(8) DECEMBER 2008: HuffPost had up to or more than 1,000 comments "pending" its approval on its news threads concerning the Gaza conflict

===============================

The screen excerpt below was captured in December 2008, from atop a HuffPost news thread dealing with the Gaza conflict. It shows that as before, HuffPost was pre-moderating comments on its news threads --- but in this case, while there were 425 comments "published," 892 were "pending" its approval:


And as is shown in this excerpt (taken from screen shot, below), HuffPost still included the following notice:

“Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to”

[NOTE: As is documented elsewhere on this blog, of the hundreds of comments that were "pending" HuffPost's approval for publication on its Gaza news threads, a wide variety of Jew-bashing, slanderously anti-Israel comments appeared on them. According to HuffPost, the only way they could have appeared there was if it had reviewed, approved and published them. Curiously, at the same time, HuffPost was also rapidly removing comments from and/or banning non-violating users, particularly those whom its resident "gang" of radical leftists announced they were complaining about --- and who gloated when HuffPost banned them.]

The special relevance of this fact, along with the validity of our allegations regarding an anti-Israel, anti-Semitic bias on HuffPost, is self-evident when one reviews this detailed archive of some of the comments that it reviewed, approved and decided to publish during Operation Cast Lead. More: See this archive of HuffPost's overall anti-Israel bias, and the hate-filled comments that it has chosen to publish, in response.

===============================

CONCLUSION: From October 2007, and unquestionably since March 1, 2008, HuffPost has been pre-moderating all user comments on its news threads. Yet it continues to falsely claim in its "policy" statements, and elsewhere, that it "post-moderates" these comments.

===============================

As is documented in this article, it is an indisputable fact that HuffPost has been pre-moderating comments on news threads at least since October 2007 to some degree, and all comments since March 2008.

This means that despite its protestations to the contrary, every user comment that has appeared on its news threads since at least as far back as March 2008 has only been visible because HuffPost reviewed it, and made the decision to approve and publish it.

Yet just as it has claimed since 2007 and long before, as of June 25, 2009, HuffPost still falsely claims on its FAQ: Comments & Moderation and Comment Policy pages that it "post-moderates comments on news threads"

The first image below is a "raw" screen capture of HuffPost's FAQ: Comments & Moderation page from June 25, 2009. Below it is an expanded view with notations (click to enlarge):


The first image below is a "raw" screen capture of HuffPost's Comment Policy page from June 25, 2009. Below it is an expanded view with notations (click to enlarge):



This fact is vitally important to keep in mind as one reviews the contents of Huff-Watch, and the incendiary, hateful and/or threatening user comments that have appeared on HuffPost news threads --- comments that are often clear, egregious violations of its (supposed) "policies" and "terms of service."

It is also extremely important to keep this fact in mind when one considers:

• Ms. Huffington's (and other official HuffPost bloggers') allegations that hateful, outrageous user comments that have appeared on HuffPost's top news threads --- which caused it negative publicity --- were the responsibility of "a miniscule number of anonymous, trouble-making trolls," and/or a vast right-wing conspiracy, to make the site look bad*. As this article documents, the fact is that since at least March 2008, and stretching back to October 2007 (if not before), HuffPost has been pre-moderating user comments on news threads. Therefore, HuffPost alone is responsible for the comments that have appeared on its news threads since that time.
  [*This particular false allegation is dissected in greater detail here. Regarding official HuffPost bloggers' false allegations that this is all due to a vast right-wing conspiracy, see "(R)" articles throughout this article.]
  
  
• The fact that HuffPost made the decision to continue enabling and protecting some of the most vicious, deranged, obsessive*, well-known violators of its "policies" to post "comments" all over its top news threads, 24-7. Even though HuffPost occasionally "banned" some of them, the documentation here on Huff-Watch shows that it often fully reinstated them days later --- under their original screen names. In these and other cases, HuffPost also refused to to ban their new, often-similar screen names, under which it has allowed them to post the exact same kinds of violating comments, endlessly --- despite user emails documenting what was occurring. Examples here, here, here; much more to follow.
  [*By "obsessive," we mean users who literally "live" on HuffPost, posting between 200-500 comments to its top news threads over 18 or more hours, every day --- thus making it impossible for an observer --- or a moderator --- to miss them.]
  
  
• All told, it is the above factors that produce the shocking difference between the comments that routinely appear on HuffPost's news threads, as compared to those on other major political websites.
  This is explored further in this article.
  

To fully grasp and really understand the depth of these facts will require some effort on the part of the reader. Acknowledging this, Huff-Watch has been designed to make the layperson's discovery of core facts, and the vital context in which to place them, as easy as possible.

We hope that via our exhaustive documentation of the very serious matters we address, HuffPost will live up to its namesake's admonition to take constructive action to correct them --- and to not "blame the messenger," an act that she apparently finds deplorable. From Ms. Huffington's December 2, 2007 article, lambasting Republican presidential contender Mike Huckabee:

It has exposed the dissembling reality behind the charming, articulate, more-preacher-than politician facade - and has called into question both his judgment and his integrity. Huckabee's response has been to fudge the truth, point the finger at everyone in sight, and -- that old standby -- blame the messenger.

===============================

ADDENDUM ITEMS

===============================

Follow this link to read these addendum items, further confirming, with physical proof, the fact that in spite of its ongoing statements to the contrary, HuffPost pre-moderates all user comments on its news threads:

ADDENDUM 1: Huff-Watch conducts three tests that prove HuffPost is not only pre-moderating user comments on its news threads, it is fast-banning users who challenge its "protected" users' leftist orthodoxy

ADDENDUM 2: In June 2008, one of HuffPost's most notorious, protected, long-term violators of its policies, "HumeSkeptic," posted confirmation --- from HuffPost itself --- that it is pre-moderating comments on news threads

ADDENDUM 3 --- OCT. 25, 2009: The same user acknowledged that HuffPost is pre-moderating (blocking) his comments from appearing

ADDENDUM 4 --- Oct. 26, 2009: On another site, one of HuffPost's most notorious violators, "KQuark" admitted that it rejects (via pre-moderation) or removes (after the fact) about half of his comments

ADDENDUM 5 --- NOV. 20, 2009: HuffPost is still falsely claiming that it "post-moderates" user comments on its news threads

ADDENDUM 6 --- FEB. 18, 2010: One of HuffPost's most egregious violators, "Typo-Knig," openly thanks the site for allowing him to be as "vile" as he wants to be

ADDENDUM 7 --- APR. 7, 2010: One of HuffPost's most vile, homophobic radical leftists, "LookToTheLeft," admits it is blocking his posts (but won't ban him)

ADDENDUM 8 --- APR. 26, 2010: HuffPost is still falsely claiming that it "post-moderates" user comments on its news threads

ADDENDUM 9 --- JULY 25, 2010: "Huffington credits her decision early on to moderate comments and keep things civil rather than allowing the typical Internet free-for-all. It’s a lot of work—HuffPo has 20 people who do nothing but weed out the nasties." (Newsweek interview)

.