portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article questions portland metro

alternative media | community building

why did the article on zaki get taken down?

if 40 people thought it was news worthy and relevant enough to comment on, shouldn't that be the indymedia editors' cue that they should leave it up?
why did the article on zaki get taken down? if 40 people thought it was news worthy and relevant enough to comment on, shouldn't that be the indymedia editors' cue that they should leave it up? what was the reason for pulling it, and is that reason or that decision making process transparent for all of us to see and criticize?

i think that article had some comments which devolved, but fundamentally i thought it was getting real differences of opinion to be aired and dealt with. i felt it was pushing people to think about what is gossip and what is substantiated. i felt it was pushing us to ask about what security culture we should have and what things might be going too far, and be too paranoid.

for these reasons i thought that article and the comments it generated were worthy of being on indymedia.

A reply from one workerbee 11.Jun.2011 12:41

~workerbee

One Indy Workerbee REPLY TO:

why did the article on zaki get taken down?
by anti sensorship author: anti sensorship

why did the article on zaki get taken down? if 40 people thought it was news worthy and relevant enough to comment on, shouldn't that be the indymedia editors' cue that they should leave it up? what was the reason for pulling it, and is that reason or that decision making process transparent for all of us to see and criticize? [[1.]]

i think that article had some comments which devolved, [[2.]] but fundamentally i thought it was getting real differences of opinion to be aired and dealt with. [[3.]] i felt it was pushing people to think about what is gossip and what is substantiated. i felt it was pushing us to ask about what security culture we should have and what things might be going too far, and be too paranoid.

for these reasons i thought that article and the comments it generated were worthy of being on indymedia. [[4.]]

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

[[1.]] No, just because 40 people replied does not mean it is newsworthy. There were facts in the original post: if the article was just presenting the facts, but it goes a step farther and claims he's a snitch. Claiming someone is a snitch and the resulted discussion doesn't directly address/differentiate this conclusion from the "facts" and at the same time the facts don't substantiate the term "snitch".

[[2.]] Agreed

[[3.]] Agreed, thus your post and your question posted right here on the PIMC newswire can pose that in a discussion type public forum of fact / sharing, questioning. It is in the wording and ones choice of words that make articles on PIMC newsworthy. Under the format that PIMC is using when a article is removed there isn't an obvious transparent place to see why. This is being considered for new upgrades in the future to PIMC. In the meantime ask your question as you did on the newswire or contact us at:  imc-portland-requests@lists.indymedia.org to get the information. You can criticize, in a respectful constructive way.

[[4.]] Agreed, with most of what you felt, the problem was the facts and the snitch name calling could not be substantiated by fact, from the reading of information posted and the workerbee discussion, the PIMC volunteer workerbees felt the article should be removed from the newswire. Your points on security culture and gossip, paranoia etc are good topic, and hence your questions are posted here on the newswire in "your post". We wholly encourage these discussions, minus the un-substantiated [snitch] name calling.

This reply [post] was from my own opinion based on some workerbee discussion on this topic, but it is my words and summary that I am writing here. In hopes to "show some transparency" and address your questions.

~workerbee