Comparing news threads: Example 9 --- People dying in Chile; HuffPost bans user who objects to radical leftists making fun of victims, playing music

This article is cross-posted at:
Comparing HuffPost comment threads to those on other major political blogsites

Keep in mind that every comment that appears on this thread is there because HuffPost reviewed, approved and made the decision to publish it. And as it says at the top of each HuffPost comment thread, only those comments that it approves will appear:

As you review the comments, keep these questions in the back of your mind:

• Do they comply with HuffPost's (supposed) Comment Policies and Terms of Service ("CP-TOS") --- or are they egregious violations of them?
  
  
• Do these threads indicate that what Ms. Huffington has repeatedly said about HuffPost is true? That it has "zero tolerance" for comments that violate its CP-TOS, and that it vigilantly monitors its news threads 24-7 to prevent such comments from appearing? But despite these efforts, "a handful of" violating comments may "occasionally slip through"? (see Section 3 here, and all, here)
  
  

EXAMPLE 9: Feb. 27, 2010: On top thread re Chile earthquake, HuffPost fast-bans a non-violating user within minutes, for objecting to its allowing long-term radical leftists to make fun of victims, hijack thread for nonsense

On February 27, an earthquake hit Chile that was estimated to be ten times the strength of the one that recently killed 200,000 in Haiti. To its credit, HuffPost posted this story as its top splash headline:

As was the case of previous threads dealing with tragedies, however, HuffPost not only enabled the radical leftists it protects and emboldens to act like maniacs, it banned a user who objected to them doing so on this particular thread.

Upon seeing what was occurring on this thread, a Huff-Watcher established a new account, as "Nocturnal Soleil." Initially, Nocturnal Soleil engaged primarily in two types of comments: (1) Sympathy for the 200+ victims who were already dead, and references to relief agencies, and (2) Rebuttals to the growing chorus of radical leftist allegations that this earthquake was caused by human-caused global warming, or capitalism, or America.

When HuffPost permitted its long-term radical leftists to once again begin making fun of the victims of this earthquake, he called them out on it. In one instance, "ChardinisAngel" claimed "NO MORE BEANS FOR CHILE," to which a number of other users erupted in laughter.

In response, "Nocturnal Soleil" copied and pasted these comments, along with his own, below, stating, "Liberal compassion - Making fun of 200+ people who just lost their lives. Hope karma isn't just speculative." As shown below, this post was published at 4:43pm (see bottom right):

Yet apparently, publishing this comment was a "mistake" by HuffPost --- because as shown in the following screencap, by 4:51pm --- 7 minutes later --- HUFFPOST BANNED "Nocturnal Soleil.":

By 5:00pm, the radical leftists that HuffPost protects and emboldens erupted in celebrations (as you read this, keep in mind that HuffPost claims it prohibits "off-topic comments"):

So if this is the standard set by HuffPost for "acceptable" user comments on a thread dealing with a tragedy of almost unimaginable proportions, what types of comments did it review, approve and decide to publish on it, by users that it chooses to protect and embolden?

Here are some PDF excerpts of the thread. Have a look --- and note how many of the users who post the most egregiously offensive, or off-topic comments, have between 50 and 1,000 "fans," meaning they are definitely not "trolls", whom Ms. Huffington likes to blame when "offensive" content is discovered on her site:

[coming soon]

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

Return to:
Comparing HuffPost comment threads to those on other major political blogsites


.