Media "Censorship"

One of the great advantages of the Web is that readers can comment on what they read and even help keep the article up to date.  That feature is rapidly slipping away. Too many web sites delete comments that they don't want others to read, not because they are rude, but because they disagree with some part of the article.

Media Matters for America is arguably one of the worst. They say:

"Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media."

They accept comments, but rational rebuttal is not permitted. You can test this for yourself or simply check the number of comments on an article for a few days in a row. The number often goes down - dramatically.

It's one thing to chose articles that prove your point. Censorship is quite another.  However, many media outlets do not accept comments at all, notably the NYT.  KTRK TV (ABC 13 in Houston) never accepted comments and just recently stopped accepting "contact us" notes.

I find these trends unsettling and I cannot accept any argument that says it costs too much to maintain those features.

A Quote Worth Requoting

Nothing like cutting to the chase. Doug Badgero, in a comment on WUWT, wrote:

I don’t want scientists stating normative arguments about policy as scientifically based. I want scientists explaining a hypothesis, providing me with ALL of the data that supports or refutes that hypothesis, and the uncertainties involved in that data. Their opinion on the normative arguments about what, if anything, to do about their hypothesis is no more important than mine.

I don't know who Mr. Badgero is, but I suspect he is a retired horticulturist in Michigan.