Saturday, December 23, 2006



A comment appeared on the previous post, Australia's Conspiracy Nuts pointing to another article on Melbourne Indymedia and claiming that the article, which blamed the Australian government for a terrorist attack in Indonesia (that killed Australians) was in fact "parody". It claims:
Deliberate lies by some Indymedia contributors are wrecking the site by destroying its credibility.
Got that? The reason Indymedia has no credibility, is because of "deliberate lies". It goes on:
If articles like this are left on the newswire, Indymedia will come to be regarded be regarded as a kook site.

One of the Melbourne Indymedia moderators, when confronted with claims it was parody, remarked:
For parody or satire, it should become obvious by the time you finish reading the piece exactly what piece of writing you were sending up. You could at least attach the URL of what you parodied at the end. I'm sorry, the parody in this article wasn't particularly effective for me, and I read alot of corporate and indy media.
Quite. I originally came across the article via UK Indymedia, where it would also be taken completely at face value - additionally raising the question of the article's local relevance to the UK site, an issue I frequently raise, which is as yet unanswered.

The Melbourne post is followed up with other comments "proving" the bombing was in fact a government plot, and there is no possibility these follow up comments are also obscure attempts at parody. These people do believe it, just as they believe the World Trade Centre was attacked by people on George W. Bush's payroll.

Why is it however, that whenever articles appear on Indymedia that shatter whatever little credibility it had to begin with, its defenders insist the articles were actually placed there as part of a deliberate effort to discredit Indymedia?

For example: Odious antisemitism on the newswire? Could only possibly be the work of Jews. Anti-Government lies? Clearly the work of government agents.

Is it at all possible, for the heads of Indymedia, to consider, just for a second, that allowing morons unrestricted access to a publishing media, means morons will contribute moronic material? Do they not appreciate, that one cannot possibly be taken seriously as a media outlet, if one exercises no control, fact-checking, editorial or other responsibility over their content?

A comment on the UK Indymedia piece asks:
Im just wondering if anyone on this site has ever actually believed that any act of terror wasn't a conspiracy with either jews, the US, or any other western nation behind it?

eventually, you'll have to face reality. Christ, they have people on tape taking credit for terrorist attacks and you still try to turn it into a conspiracy. Is it just fun for you, or do you actually believe the crap that flies onto this site?
Why yes. That's why the article in question remains on the UK Indymedia site.

Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours? .