What did The Guardian censor today?

The BaronCharlus said about two brief mentions of new posts on this site, including Since when was a newspaper strictly a mercantilist tool? that were deleted after less than an hour on The Guardian‘s books blog yesterday,

You’re definitely being censored (assuming your ‘moderated’ post wasn’t just off-topic swearing).

Oh I can swear with the best of them, Baron, and that’s typically when exasperated with myself. . . But I’ll let you and other honourable readers judge that newspaper’s guillotine-tenders for yourselves.

I put this one on a Poster Poems thread, a few minutes after the threadmeister himself posted:

Nov 21 08, 8:57am (1 minute ago)

TyrannosaurusAlan, this might be a perspective that would get your stamp of approval — not sure . . .

And I put this one on the thread about Sarah Palin, that instinctive cosmopolitan, who will soon demonstrate the superiority of Alaskan volkspeak to anything in English or American literature of any century:

Nov 21 08, 9:01am (1 minute ago)

Well, JeanHannah, you’ve certainly earned your windup spurs with this blog — and here’s a post written partly in reply:

Since GU bloggers have been inserting links to their sites into comments for at least the year-and-a-half I’ve been posting there, I was hardly doing anything extraordinary.



Filed under Book publishing, Censorship

10 responses to “What did The Guardian censor today?

  1. This blog thing is a cross posting business by nature – But I remember some rule about not discussing moderation.

    I think the moderators on the Arts blogs are quite intolerant and inflexible. Which is laughable, because art – literature and the rest of it- is almost by definition something that pushes the boundries and that is uncensored.

    It can only be explianed satisfactoraly in one way. The Arts blog moderators point of view. They do not see the posters as creators of interesting content but as poor petitioners, responding to articles. On the contrary. The standard of posting is usually far superior to the blogs on offer from the Arts Blog editor makes.

    I would like to see blogs from you and artpepper and the rest. And it is possible. I managed it on the food blog and then CiF.

    If the Arts blog editor knew her onions, and I increasingly think she may not, she would make the line more permeable and be a little bit more creative and permissive about her use of the medium.

    And yet on the rest of the arts blog what is there? – a wasteland. One / two / three comments, most of them generated by the same crew.

    But on the threads that we choose to meet on there are 300 – 100 comments and usually, unless it is Carol, I don’t even start off by reading the article. I read the commenters.

    I have enjoyed all of them recently. The new ones: Pinkroom, 3potato4, deadgod, BaronCharlus, USM etc

    But I think, Wordy, you are the natural literary critic of what happens. I have always reguarded the Guardian threads as your literary Salon (if it’s OK to say that). Prose is your style. Pulling me up or taking Billy to task and so on.

    We make the threads live.

    Where’s the payback?

  2. From my understanding, technically at least, it is the moderating team who make the decisions about bannong users, which is perfect for an arts editor to disclaim any responsibility in relation to the more creative types not being allowed space to act in print.

    For me it has been a gaffe in which to learn, compete, practice and genrally, improve on the writing, and at first, my grasp of what was going on behind the screen, was quaintly off-kilter. I had a mental image of Sarah Crown, the then blokes blog editor, being a terribly decent sort, and projecting my own skewered fantasy of literate nirvanah onto people i did not know and could only guess at – spent the first year in some psychic sussing out via the medium of the written word, and went through several recognisable stages of development to the current state of being effectively a short lived printed entity whose fate is one of ultimately, silence.

    Art i believe, is a game-with-self, in which the challenge is to continually produce better quality work, and in the game of Poetry, which seems to be the ultimate placebo, which *makes nothing happen* – so goes the Auden refrain, with the line immediately following this oft quoted one, always left out but which demonstrates a more accurate representation of what the baggy faced brit was really getting at –

    it survives.
    In the valley of its making where executives
    Would never want to tamper…
    A way of happening, a mouth.

    . . . continues here: https://acacciatura.wordpress.com/longueurs-november-2008/

  3. I keep on hoping for a bardic poem from you Des, but what we get is a repetitive stream of consciousness.

    So put up. Here, Des, on wordy’s blog!

    Or is there some good stuff on your own blog?

  4. 3p4

    some thing about my nonsenseibillies
    lean me toward the underdog
    but i dont really have a lot of time
    (its up) for the king of the hill,
    ,the best of the best,,
    the cock of the hoop,,
    the alpha dog
    the power and the glory
    the Alfy and Omigod
    just leave me
    in the dust
    but for the grace………….

  5. There was a village called civilisation Sir
    Eliot’s ancient village bought for a kiss
    through an invisible pane of intelligence
    Little remains of: nothing of the owners
    eye after s/he auctioned his tongue, part

    I from prayer, part stolen, silently wrapped
    lustre of a son eying cold the sustenenance
    Of oil and the horror of its contract longing
    in a poetic soul and sold to the high caste.
    There is a village called civilisation sir.

    Serene small village, of infants blood sold
    twice: once for money and once for love,
    Earning its right to measure between what sun
    And sibling moon the village accent shone
    Reputations frankly bought, falls leavening
    Neither truth nor lies, but in the equipoise
    sounding classless, a twenty first century voice.

  6. wordnerd7

    That’s very good news that we haven’t lost you, @3p4. Would you have any objection to my trying to put the recording I came by onto this site some time over the next few days — as part of my experiment? . . . I won’t be offended in the least if you say you have a grander home for it in mind. . . I was surprised and hugely entertained by it, and it would fun to see what our comrades make of it — assuming that they haven’t also had copies transmitted to them mysteriously.

    @ISA, there’s nothing quite like an imagination to add spice to life, is there? I do dearly love the space I seem to occupy in the literary part of yours (thank you 😉 . . .) but I don’t feel as if I have any role at all at Gu. In this respect, I’m sure that the authorities and I think exactly alike. . . I’m not sure that they see us bloggers as individuals. They would hardly ignore our questions if they did, would they. . . And when we lost one of the best of the best of our tribe a few weeks ago, no editor came out to express any regret or offer condolences here or on his own site. . .(Or did I miss someone?) . . . I know that there was a @carolru blog about Steve at Gu, and the nicest books blog freelances went to the doggytrollocks site and left Mrs cs messages — but what about the staffers?

    . . . I think it’s time for more interwebbing between those above and below. As you say, cross-linking and cross-commenting are of the essence of this medium. That was more or less Arianna Huffington’s and Tina Brown’s answer the other day when people asked Arianna if she minded her old friend launching a site that looked like a direct competitor. . . Either one or both women also said something to the effect that cyberspace is still wide open to colonisation by anyone who cares to have a go. . . So when we post a comment over there, with a link to one of our sites, shouldn’t the above-the-liners stop in now and then, in our patches of ether?

    @Des, thank you for the poem, which I’m still taking in. . . As you see, I’ve moved part of your long post into Longueurs, to keep one of my own company — and I imagine you’ll want to do that yourself the next time. . . Would be deeply grateful if you would . . . I’ve given you a slightly bigger space than the 250(?) _character_-limit your own comments section offered me when I tried posting there the other day. . . That blog space is like The Times. Only interested in nano-posts, as far as I can tell — no time to investigate.

  7. Nice. To the rhythm of the Pogues. But you should name names Des.

    Turn up you internal thermostat to warm, 3p4. It’s winter.

  8. 3p4

    wordy,, you may do whatever you wish with the
    recording,,you might be able to squeeze one or two out of the Baron as well,,and i have others,,poetry
    ,,fake radio,,music,,montage,,etc etc,, lets have an art gallery too,,hey how about a coffe shop,,and baby sitting,,and dog grooming and ,,a nd,,andn

    why is this on a censorship thread ?

  9. I didn’t know about the character limit wordy. i will have a look at the settings and change it. it must be trge default position.

    cheers isa, no names needed, only rifing in Eliot.

    i love you and want you to come and move in to me bedsit, once and for all.


  10. We are all already in your bedsit, Des.

    I’m Spartacus.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s