ConservativeHome buries its head in the sand

It bodes ill for grassroots conservatives if their main online venue for discussion and sharing their views is using its recently applied moderation process to censor reasoned comments that are critical of the government and ConservativeHome itself.

It is true I comment on the site less frequently than before, but this post yesterday was deserving of a response. I duly submitted my response to Melanchthon which was displayed by the moderators. By following that link and clicking on ‘show more comments’ you can see the replies to my comment.  One of the replies, by ‘Pauline Smith’ stood out for the serious and disturbing point it made – but one of the regular commenters on the site, ‘SuperBlue’, made one of his frequent dismissals of anything that does not register with his sycophantic fanatacism and unquestioning approval of anything and everything Cameron and the Conservative Party say and do:

This is the stock response from ‘SuperBlue’. If someone says something critical of the Conservatives they are either UKIP, a ‘troll’ or as in this case they are pretending to be in difficulty and do not actually ‘exist’.

There are far too many people for whom the Pauline Smith experience is reality. At the heart of this is the energy and climate change policy of this and the previous government. So I submitted another comment to make this point.

My follow up comment covered SuperBlue’s track record of prostrating himself before anything and everything Team Cameron say and do so that his comment was put in its proper context, how Chris Huhne and David Cameron’s policies will make Britain’s energy the most expensive (and inefficient) in the western world and drive millions of people into fuel poverty – something not one MP will experience – and that it was about time ConservativeHome, which has adopted an increasingly tabloid style recently, did the grassroots a favour and focused its attention on the effects of this government’s energy and climate change policy and hold their party colleagues to account.

The comment has been moderated out. Other comments submitted today – including from SuperBlue in the same part of the thread – have been published. It seems dealing with weighty matters of major national interest are now beyond ConservativeHome and instead we can expect more of this highbrow stuff. Such home truths seems to have made the editors somewhat uncomfortable and prompted censorship, despite the comment being in no way abusive or containing bad language. An email has been sent to Tim Montgomerie asking why the comment has been withheld.

8 Responses to “ConservativeHome buries its head in the sand”

  1. 1 graham wood 03/01/2011 at 12:28 pm

    AM Perhaps you will keep your readers up to date as to what reply you receive from Tim Montgomerie.
    I see not cause at all for your comment being ignored or edited out. The very last thing we need from Conservative Home, or any other Blog is arbitrary ‘editing’ of unwelcome views from bloggers.
    I hope this is an oversight but suspect that it is not.

  2. 2 Autonomous Mind 03/01/2011 at 12:56 pm

    No reply so far Graham, but if I receive one I will update the post.

  3. 3 Techno 03/01/2011 at 1:17 pm

    The first comment I submitted after they started moderating never appeared so I have always assumed it was moderated out. The comment was perfectly reasonable, didn’t attack anybody and had no bad language.

    So I don’t comment anymore. If there is a really urgent point that needs to be made I might have a go but otherwise I don’t bother anymore.

  4. 4 Fay Tuncay 03/01/2011 at 2:32 pm

    A NEED FOR A RIGHT FOOT FORWARD Evidence-based political blogging?

    I share your frustration with ConservativeHome they are totally clueless on climate policy and they just do not want to ‘rock the boat’. The lack of a grassroots voice, organisation and leadership for classical liberals is a real concern on all fronts.

    The climate policy is doomed to fail. ConservativeHome is – like the whole of the political class – is out of touch with reality. The climate policy – the rapid decarbonisation of the British economy, regressive carbon taxes, will effectively price British industry, goods and services out of the global market, due to higher energy costs. No one will buy British anything and the brightest and the best will migrate.

    My prediction for the future is that the climate policy will be THE issue at the next general election. The general public and a push from the far left and the right will crush the centre. If the right does not start to organise there will be a coup from the left, which will steel the show. Perhaps it is time for a Right Foot Forward grassroots campaign.

    Repeal the Act!

  5. 5 andrew hammerschmiedt 03/01/2011 at 2:48 pm

    To those reading Montgomerie central I say why not try

  6. 6 Riddi of England 03/01/2011 at 6:15 pm

    A further observation on conhome if i may.

    I have noted a substantial increase in “sign posting” to articles “FT(£)”.

    I emailed asking what was the strategy behind this i.e.

    Get redirected… hit paywall… return to CH miffed.

    Why would you send supporters up a dead end ?

    Could the site funder intimate that such promotion would be acceptable ?
    Could FT pay by referral ?

    I truly dont know .Any enlightenment please.

  7. 7 Autonomous Mind 03/01/2011 at 8:17 pm

    A quick update Graham, I sent Tim Montgomerie the email 10 hours ago and there has been no reply. I don’t think one is coming.

    I suppose, to quote a fine lady, they are ‘frit’.

  8. 8 Barry 04/01/2011 at 12:09 am

    It is utterly corrosive for the State to laud the winter fuel payment schemes and warmfront and the rest. Stop increasing our energy bills. Are we witnessing an addiction taking hold within the State? It must be the blackest of hearts that thinks it okay to purposely push more and more people into fuel poverty on the understanding that at least some will be handed the confiscated wealth of others.

    Might they now be content for more and more people to be ‘helped’ and bigger and bigger sums can be said to have been redistributed? They’ve got their target arse first – the higher the numbers of people supported and amount of money redistributed the better. They should be seeking to reduce the numbers of people in fuel poverty *before* fuel welfare schemes are taken into account.

    The axiom of giving a man a fish and he can feed his family for a day, give a man a net and he can feed his family for a lifetime applies here. Subsidise energy bills for some and you’ve got to keep on subsidising them. Find means to reduce energy bills and you don’t need to subsidise anyone. They are exploiting fuel starved pensioners just as they have exploited feckless families for years.

Comments are currently closed.

Enter your email address below

The Harrogate Agenda Explained

Email AM

Bloggers for an Independent UK

AM on Twitter

Error: Please make sure the Twitter account is public.

STOR Scandal

Autonomous Mind Archive

%d bloggers like this: