Comments on: MCCL Fall Tour Open to the Public, but Not the Press

By: Robin Marty

Robin Marty — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 13:56:40 +0000

well "Deleting legitimate points are certainly within the rights of a partisan blogsite owner but isn't something that any legitimate news source does."

Funny, the big question does all the time. I guess that is a partisan blogsite now. And note that most newsites don't have comments on stories. I think I see why.

As for stifling and tramping down on your viewpoints, if that were the case you would have been banned many many months ago "monitor exposer".

By: Robin Marty

Robin Marty — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 13:53:47 +0000

AP style check your ap style handbook – the proper phrases are anti-abortion and pro-choice. Take it up with the AP, not us.

By: Les

Les — Thu, 11 Oct 2007 10:22:31 +0000

Maybe you answered your own question They probably expected comments like this:

""This opens the door up for further regulation of abortion," Bauer said, which shows that there is at least one thing on which anti-abortion and pro-choice activists agree."

Which is intirely different than:

--which shows there is at least one thin on which the pro-life and anti-life activist agree"

Then of course, we have the threat of censorship in this thread. How is that different than asking you to leave the meeting?

By: monitorexposer

monitorexposer — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 16:17:41 +0000

?? Why is Planned Parenthood handing out scented oils and candles?

By: Paul Schmelzer

Paul Schmelzer — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 15:07:12 +0000

Absolutely. And here's how we define legitimate comments. Get too far off topic, and the thoughts of the above-mentioned thoughtful reader are toast.

By: monitorexposer

monitorexposer — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:01:19 +0000

Really? Do you really believe that MCCL is not aware of left-wing astroturf websites? "Press" may not be an accurate description, but neither is "part of the public".

Thoughful readers will have noted that Minnesota Monitor's credibility, and that of it's "reporters" (or more properly stated the lack thereof) speaks directly to the headline of this post.

I seriously doubt that a reporter from a legitimate newspaper or television news show would have been asked to leave.

Is it so surprising that MCCL declined to offer a leftist shill the opportunity to gather information that will certainly be used in a biased manner (which was done despite the fact that Jeff was not allowed to attend)?

Oh, and by the way.

Deleting legitimate points are certainly within the rights of a partisan blogsite owner but isn't something that any legitimate news source does.

By: Jeff Fecke

Jeff Fecke — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 11:07:52 +0000

Indeed… Had I not been considered part of the press, I would have been allowed to stay…as I'd just be part of the public, then.

By: Paul Schmelzer

Paul Schmelzer — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:34:36 +0000

Wonder away, however: The MCCL rep didn't cite the politics of Minnesota Monitor's funders, but noted that "the press" in general wasn't allowed.

That said, if this launches an off-topic comment thread on MNMON's funding, I'll begin deleting comments.

By: monitorexposer

monitorexposer — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 10:20:24 +0000

The thoughtful reader wonders if MCCL doesn't consider groups funded by “Democrats with deep pockets that do not wish to be identified” (Eric Black's words) not to be legitimate “press”.

By: monitorexposer

monitorexposer — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

The thoughtful reader wonders if MCCL doesn’t consider groups funded by “Democrats with deep pockets that do not wish to be identified” (Eric Black’s words) not to be legitimate “press”.