Argus can't take it
Another 'Paul' has written this letter on the Argus website. It comes after the paper has again printed a bog-standard press release by David Davies - the kind that all self-respecting newspapers would throw away.
"The facts about food in the story are true and for once I agree with the self publicist Davies.
This letter was swiftly removed from the Argus website. Other highly intelligient comments critical of the Argus also disappeared. See comments. Let me know if your comments are banned from the Argus site or letters not published in the letters page. They claim to believe in free speech. It's free speech only for the foul-mouthed moronic bigots that infest their site.
Below are the comments from readers which have appeared on my blog about this.
Another string to the Argus bow is that they regularly remove any comments criticising their editorial standards from their website - as this one has been. Fair enough, it's their website after all, but they will allow libellous comments about everyone else like the police, council and private businesses to remain for their "thousands" of web viewers.
Posted by: Jim| May 16, 2007 at 12:01PM
Yes I've noticed this too. I posted twice today on two separate stories both of which have now been removed. In fact the story this blog focuses on has had all the posts removed and you can no longer comment on.
Puts paid to the statement that the Argus does not monitor comments.
That's fascinating Stardust and Jim.
I know they cut letters critical of themseleves of -in my case- edit them to take out key comments or punchlines. Perhaps we can have a section on my site of messages removed by the Argus. It should be interesting.
Contributions warmly welcomed.
Posted by: Paul Flynn | May 16, 2007 at 01:49 PM
There's something fundamentally wrong when it allows all the racist comments to stay on the site in the name of free speech, but removes comments that simply question its standards or politics. The net is already eroding its monopoly on Newport news and long may it continue.
Posted by: Jim | May 16, 2007 at 01:52 PM
Could you let have copies of your comments that were removed by the Argus?
Posted by: Paul Flynn | May 16, 2007 at 02:24 PM
I dont think it is talking out of turn to see that the argus has a right-wing bias...
As someone who regularly puts out press releases to the argus, and getting to know a few staff there, i cant really have any complaints with regards my own work. However, it has been prone to printing inaccuracies and leaving out crucial information, but that is life.
On the surface it does appear that David 'two and half jobs' Davies gets a very high press release to story ratio though.
Any paper must be willing to utilise the internet and accept the beast as it comes, a very double edged sword is the medium formally known as the information superhighway, and the argus must at the very least be consistent.
Welcome to the blogsophere Mr Flynn...
I have found the Argus to be highly inaccurate, often unable to get the most basic facts correct. In a recent tribute to Rosie it had the wrong school, and I have seen it lable Mr. Flynn as the MP for Newport East on regular occasions. It is time they checked their facts.
Posted by: Janet | May 16, 2007 at 03:19 PM
The first comment endorsed Paul's view that David Davies breaking wind gets a higher profile than a Newport politician campaigning for Newport's jobs.
The second comment removed simply asked why the other comments had been removed.
I didn't keep the original post but will copy all my other posts in future, knowing they have an outlet on this thread/blog/comments or whatever it's called!
Posted by: Jim | May 16, 2007 at 03:38 PM