Thread: CBC Radio anti-male Censorship

You would think the CBC feminist lesbian moderator's would get a clue?

Almost every story that has comments open has someone pointing out the gender bias and unfair moderation that attempts to sway public opinion.

Here is a prime example of how CBC would not let facts or factual referals to be posted;

CBC SAYS SHUT UP TO MALE VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

CBC SAYS SHUT UP TO MALE VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE « Truthjustice's Blog


and if you think spreading the word about CBC even phases them,think again.

CBC does not care-you will also never hear anything about your complaint against them,as it will be thrown in the trash along with the thousands of others.

Try a complaint to the CBC ombudsman-at least his office has a form letter for a response.

It looks like my belly aching has worked they have finally posted it.

Sites like antimisandry.com offer a serious threat of public shaming of those in power, ironically one of the most important functions of the media.

Outdoors the Ombudsman sounds like a good idea, I forgot about him.

Outdoors the Ombudsman sounds like a good idea, I forgot about him.

I doubt very much this will get you anywhere,as I and many others have tried.

Don't let that stop you though.

The (CBC) Canadian Biased Channel is a disgrace to Canadians as people! Feminazi's have taken over the comments of the CBC blog.
Oh ya thats all the feminazi know how to do!!

Just my opinion

Outdoors: Good link, thanks for linking this.

Electro: Thanks for the supporting comment, I can see you have experienced the same. I wish we could retire the term 'Feminazi' though, its not helpful.

I contacted Lynda Shorten the Executive Producer of "As it Happens". She responded promptly and expressed puzzlement as to why I should be censored. She asked for more details and then sent it all on to the "Moderation team". Shorten imo has acted professionally.

The Moderation Team responded with

Dear ******,

Thank you for your inquiry. We have confirmed that your comment (see
below) was posted this morning.

We have multiple moderators working at once and because this is a
'human-based' system, there are inevitably some inconsistencies. The
guidelines require interpretation on the part of the moderators and thus
there are instances where identical comments are handled differently by
different moderators.

Hope this helps to clear up any confusion.
The CBC Moderation Team

I responded with

Dear CBC Moderation Team,
Thank you for you reply. The fact remains that this post was moderated at least twice as being unsuitable. It was posted on my 3rd attempt which may have been an objective judgement on the part of the moderator or a reaction to my follow up post. My post although possibly not to the liking of some is not unreasonable commentary by any stretch of the imagination.

In short, which ever way you cut it, members of the moderation team are indulging in censorship of reasonable views.

Regards

I await their reply

Sites like antimisandry.com offer a serious threat of public shaming of those in power

Antimisandry.com is a serious source of all kinds of resources that I rely heavily upon.

Quote from Xxavier

It looks like my belly aching has worked they have finally posted it.

Sites like antimisandry.com offer a serious threat of public shaming of those in power, ironically one of the most important functions of the media.

Outdoors the Ombudsman sounds like a good idea, I forgot about him.

It would not only be this site as quite a few bloggers and site owners visit here as well and maybe we should have a special notice heading for specific issues that require specific attention so it can be passed around for further exposure. We need to apply specific pressure as we did on that "The Talk" program to make sure that we FTSU in every way possible..

The MRM has already demonstrated that if the requirement is there and the issue is severe enough than action will be taken..

The MRM has already demonstrated that if the requirement is there and the issue is severe enough than action will be taken..

100% in agreement with that comment.

rep up

The Moderation Team haven't even admitted they have done anything wrong. Even a "Sorry that was wrong we'll make sure it won't happen again" would have helped. This suggests the problem might be deeply systemic.

I'll give them another working day to mull this over.

Good luck with that.

Just posted a comment and it will be interesting to see if it does get posted or rejected. I queried your comment and asked whether it was standard practise to refer to men's violence as a generality rather than referencing it specifically as an issue as they do with violence against women..

Waiting..


christianJ. wrote:Posted 2011/08/11
at 1:20 AM ETre:- Zimbabwe Torture camps..

I am surprised just as one of the previous posters is regarding the obvious anti-male bias demonstrated by this article and also this site. Is it standard practise that whenever issues pertaining to male violence are covered it will be referred to as a general situation rather than stating specifically that it is a violence against men issue. How is that determined ?

Well still no response from them, I fired this off. I also had a chat with the CBC Ombudsman, he was helpful.

Dear Moderation Team,

In furtherance to my previous email that you have not responded to.

Either you are willfully misinterpreting my complaint or genuinely feel that a moderator could reasonably feel my post did not fit the CBC guidelines. I find both options troubling.

The post in question was moderated as unsuitable multiple times though it clearly fits the guidelines and expresses a view clearly capable of being held by a reasonable person. It was only posted after I submitted a very terse follow up post of complaint.

Plain and simply this is censorship and as far as I can determine from your reply there is every possibility this could happen again.

Unless I can get assurances that this type of moderation is considered unacceptable by the Moderation Team and will not happen again, then I have no option but to pursue my complaint further. The avenues for which are many.

Charges of anti-male bias against the CBC have been made before. This matter adds weight to those charges, unless it is cleared up promptly.

Regards

I think the moderation firm CBC is using is icucmoderation.com , I'll check this carefully then fire off an email. I doubt they'd want there name associated with anti-Male bias.

It also looks like other people are having the same problem

CBC Forum Censorship - View topic

CBC may have a bigger problem than it thinks.

Xxavier you may be able to use those comments to further your case against them. It always carries more weight when more than one person files a complaint.