Opinion Web Exclusive

Huffington Post begins censorship of comments to combat internet trolls

David Delgado// The Daily Cougar

David Delgado// The Daily Cougar

In an example of a much larger national dialogue surrounding online harassment and trolls, the Huffington Post will be effectively banning anonymous comments from its website.

Beginning in September, any reader will be required to register their first and last names before commenting on the Post’s website.

Huffington cited numerous breaches in its screening algorithms as the motivating force behind her decision, mostly through users replacing alphabetical letters with numeric symbols.

Huffington’s decision reflects a greater struggle with online “trolling” and cyber bullying felt nationwide.

What was once restricted to social media has now perforated nearly every Web-based public forum. What truly separates these digital hounds from the hackers of the past is quite simple, really: the medium they’ve turned into their digital playground is one of the most frequently accessed ones across all demographics.

It’s no secret that online journalism’s popularity has skyrocketed post-millennially; according to Mashable, more than 40 percent of Americans cite the web as their primary news source. The depreciation of print journalism isn’t anything to be disregarded; in fact, it’s the reason so much of today’s media is born on the web.

For trolls, this decline is nothing short of a godsend, as it essentially channeled millions of ritualistic readers to a concentrated corner of the web.

Sara Robinson, UH alum and graduate of the UH Foresight Master’s degree, talked about the general sense of being cheated out of a revolutionary development by the presence of these trolls.

“Trolls are a constant problem for both bloggers and mainstream news outlets … They’re killing the promise that online media once had as a democratic forum,” Robinson said. “In too many places, it’s turned into a 24/7 bar room brawl.”

Though Huffington’s decision isn’t the first development in an effort to combat trolls, it’s undoubtedly the most significant. What separates Huffington’s decision from the efforts of others, though, is its foundation in Huffington’s interpretation of the right to free speech.

“Freedom of expression is given to people who stand up for what they’re saying and not hiding behind anonymity,” Huffington said shortly after her latest journalistic endeavor was announced.

While Huffington’s certainly justified in this statement, the logic that reinforces it suggests potentially perilous behavior, especially as the integration of media and web brings about more struggles.

A person’s right to voice their own opinions isn’t rooted in their intentions; it’s rooted in their humanity.

Our rights as citizens aren’t variable to how we plan on using them. While Huffington’s latest policy isn’t quite an infringement on these rights, it’s certainly a step in a perilous direction.

The annoyance of online trolls is universally undeniable. However, as technology becomes increasingly integral to our lives, it’s absolutely critical that we’re able to differentiate between basic regulations and a decision in the premature stages of becoming an infringement on our basic human rights.

Senior staff columnist Cara Smith is a communications junior and may be reached at [email protected]


  • How is it censorship when a site insists people be responsible for the words they use by associating their names to their words? Following this logic, letters to the editor are censorship because newspapers traditionally verify an author’s identity before publication.

    • You’re right. But only to a certain extent. Of these newspapers that you refer to, how many of them require Facebook “verification” specifically?

    • How is it not censorship just because a person doesn’t want to be identified? Anonymity is an important part of the democratic process. Do you know why voting is anonymous? It’s so that people don’t get bullied into voting a particular way. Do you honestly think that there are no valid things to say that also might have undue repercussions? Requiring that people be identified with everything they have to say is simply adding a layer of trial by ordeal. It has nothing to do with the subject at hand and it sets limits on honesty. If the price we have to pay for that is the occasional troll I think it’s worth it. How many freedoms would be sacrificed if everything had to be polite?

    • Further, letters to the editor are hand-picked for relevance at the discretion of a publication’s editor / staff. In terms of censorship it is the very definition, were your argument not a case of comparing apples and, say, Guatemala.

  • I have to agree with Barry. The Huffington Post isn’t striking all comments that are deemed to be troll-like; they’re merely making sure people can be held responsible for what they say, which is part of a healthy democracy. And freedom of speech isn’t always free. There are many cases and circumstances where speech can legally be curbed.

    I do appreciate your well written article, especially the part about voices being rooted in humanity.

    • Your post is an absolute joke. Who says something makes no difference in the speech. Your position is the basic fallacy of Ad Hominem, i.e. attacking the person instead of attacking what they say. It makes no difference who says X, all that matters is what they say. A healthy democracy is based on the content of speech, not on the content of the character of the person who speaks. What you bring up is just another way for Totalitarian governments to round up the people for what they say because they don’t like the speech.

  • If you see a troll or feel bullied, post your comment, let your voice be heard, then click on the little red X button and close the page. Cyber-bulling…really? If ANYONE loses any sleep or drops a tear from your eye because of what someone says in the comment section of a story, do us all a favor and smash your computer and go outside. Get a taste of real life.
    P.S. Don’t forget your sunscreen…

    • No kidding. Back a year or two ago I had some several comments deleted for no reason I can point to aside from thought crime, having been particularly careful to craft responses to the related content without malice or vicious language. Since, I haven’t considered it a reputable website.

      If this is what “liberalism” is then I want nothing to do with it. Give me some crazy libertarian over censor-happy authoritarians.

    • So do the others…even conservative sites. And not just for trolls, anything that doesn’t jive with their narrative. It’s really unbelievable.

  • Huffpost censors because they attempt to silence progressive thought and advocacy… Since their takeover by AOL there is a marked pattern of censorship, and permission for right wing fringers to go even so far as to threaten the president, especially one FOXY SHAZAM, whom is a true nutcase…. The fringers go at obama like a sharkfest feeding frenzy… expressing blatant hate and racism and homophobia, while the site’s ‘mods’ censor progressive expressions, even innocuous ones, that challenge the fringe right’s blatant hate… I believe this is related to the takeover by AOL, and has NOTHING to do with ‘trolls’… for the disparity of HPL opinion between left and right is STUNNING…. I won’t be back, for even their editorial content has shifted to the corporate right….

    • I’m glad to read these posts re: huffington post censorship.
      I’ve been a member for 5 years, 500+ fans, double-digit approvals on many of my comments AND a superuser, yet…
      In the past several weeks on all but the most benign innocuous topics…cute puppies, “10 Ways to Know You’re Dating a Real Man”…my comments are deleted.
      Many times “commented has been deleted” pops up as soon as I hit the post button.
      I am shutting down my membership. NOW.

      • Same here, 500+ and many faves, Just quit.

        “”Thoughtcrime does not entail death; thoughtcrime is death.
        “Never again will you be capable of ordinary human feeling. Everything will be dead inside you. Never again will you be capable of love, or friendship, or joy of living, or laughter, or curiosity, or courage, or integrity. You will be hollow. We shall squeeze you empty and then we shall fill you with ourselves.”

      • I had hundreds of fans, but I didn’t quit, my account was deleted arbitrarily in September. In any case, good riddance. HP uses the frankly idiotic “moderator”-driven model of censorship, and there are apparently a bunch of extremely biased moderators who suppress any comments they dislike. Whatever. Arianna Huffington is a joke anyway. By the way, HuffP is somehow not profitable yet, in spite of its massive traffic.

  • If anyone’s still reading/commenting on this article, can anyone point me in the right direction of a HuffPost alternative I can go? My account was banned for no reason, or no reason that I have ever been informed of, at least. I cannot sign up for another one because they are now requiring that new users create an account via a “verified” Facebook account. I do not have a Facebook account and don’t want one. Even if I was to try to sign up for a “dummy” account, Facebook still requires “verification” by providing them with either a mobile number or a college email address. The latter is de facto impossible for students outside the U.S, whose campus emails end in the respective TLD of their country (.ca for Canada, .ac.uk for Britain, .in for India, etc.).

    The irony is that Arianna Huffington is from the very same country where “democracy” was founded — Greece is the word, or should I say “demo kratia,” translated as “rule of the people.” Unfortunately, it’s getting to be more and more of an echo chamber for Ari’s celebrity friends, and less so a place for free exchange of ideas from the “hoi polloi.”

  • More like to combat any points of view that make conflict with their overly liberally brain washed users/ editors foam at the mouth and boil red.

  • I agree with Don Aye. Censorship at the Huffington Post has gone FAR beyond controlling flames. I’ve been seeing right-wing bias creeping in for the past two years at least. It’s easy to blame AOL, but my recollection is that the thought police arrived even before AOL.

    A few weeks ago, HuffPo posted an article from “24/7 Wall Street” which had a title something like: “The Worst-Run States In America.” The article put California at the top of the list, because of its “budget deficit.”

    Well, actually, a year ago, California ELIMINATED its budget deficit.

    Three times, I tried to post a comment criticizing 24/7 Wall Street for its poor fact checking, and upbraiding HuffPo for accepting the article as-is. Wasn’t it big news on the Huffington Post, when Californians passed Proposition 30? Wasn’t it noted that Jerry Brown and a super-majority of Democrats in the California legislature — so often stereotyped as reckless spendthrifts — brought California some much-needed fiscal responsibility? Was there no one on the HuffPo staff who remembered any of that?

    Three times, I tried to post various versions of that comment. My language was forthright, but not rude. They wouldn’t post a thing. Alas, I have many other examples.

    As of this week, HuffPo now requires you to authenticate your posts, and so I’m done with the site for good. I’m a member of the Green Party, and it was only a few years ago that the TSA barred several Green activists from getting on airplanes (I’ll bet you didn’t hear about that story).

    • It is puzzling how the PoopHo, I mean, HuffPo blocks any comments that fail to go with their ultra left wing program. I have never been censored on FoxNews or Drudge-linked sites, yet on HP you have to redact your comments carefully in order to get posted. I guess freedom of speech is not quite a liberal value.

      • They’re not liberals…they are progressives/flat-out-socialist! True Liberals believe in the constitution and limited government…aka, tea party!

  • Huffington Post has raised censorship to a whole new level. Any conservative, or anyone else who disagrees with them, is considered to be a “troll”.

    Saturday, 12/14/13, I found they will not allow me to post on any political article unless I have a Facebook account. Many conservatives do not like or trust Facebook and would not want a Facebook account tied to Huffington any way.

    Today, when I post they decided to change the name I post under to one that uses my last name.

    This is all just another way to make sure only their biased swill reaches their readers. “State Run Media” coming soon to every news source near you.

    • They are now requiring all users to connect to FB and use their real names in order to comment on any article, and they implemented that on Dec. 10. It’s not a political decision, and it’s also not about trolls. Data mining is profitable, and everything they’re saying about trolls and civility is just cover. They can’t very well say “we did it because we want to gain as much information as possible about our users and their facebook friends in order to get more money from advertisers looking to get to a specific audience. Also, we did it because getting to know all that information about our users will allow us to better target them within our own site to increase the number of articles they click on”. Think about how much money they can make with your list of friends, your age, your location, your hobbies, your family info, your education and work history, your entertainment tastes… There aren’t many people who trust facebook (a poll found 11% trusted them “some/a lot” in terms of privacy), and that’s because data mining is at the heart of their business model and they are very good at it. Now HP will have access to a decent amount of that data, and FB will gain new users and more information about their current users based on how they use HP.

      Huge numbers of people are leaving HP because of these changes, and that’s not confined to any one group of people.

      • I agree with what you are saying too kbg1. I didn’t consider all that you are saying because I wouldn’t touch FB with a ten foot pole. I don’t trust the government not to mine it for information in much the same way you describe.

        I also believe this is a stunning tactic HP is using to get conservative, anti FB people out of their comment section. I have posted there for 2 years and lately there have been more conservatives posting. HP can’t have that. They want everyone on the Leftist bandwagon. If you go on HP now, and read the posts, they have achieved their goal.

        Merry Christmas, Ho, Ho, Ho!

      • If I see that the comment section is controlled by FB, I don’t even bother.
        If you want a good idea where all this is heading, read “The Circle” by Dave Eggars. It is the Orwellian, “1984” for the current age.

  • Huffington post needs to Censor the illicit comments left on AOL PATCH. Maybe the legal system needs to look Into the unethical practices and political favoring. The SEC should look into All three of these online sites where advertisement pays for sensational community stories that allow internet trolls to harass the people PATCH targets Why hasn’t patch been investigated for Political favoring? They promote cyber harassment. No wonder why AOL investors want to exit Patch. Patch is a destructive site that should be investigated from top to bottom.

  • HP has made a bargain with the devil in its new Mod policy, and is no longer a meaningful site for Social Commentary or Cultural Criticism, so far as its once proud and very active, vibrant public commentariate is concerned.

    In its attempt to shield itself from some forms of criticism issuing from Washington DC and other policing members of the Security State, HP has opened the doors to thoroughgoing suppression of Free Expression, and NOT merely because HP now requires FB validation of Identity (for the purpose of legal liability), but because it has secretly adopted a policy of censorship unaccountable to and wholly unguided by any stated policy on Commentary Guidelines. It has become abundantly clear that censorship of the HP public commentariate has taken-on economic (marketing), psychologic (concept of “civility” defined by Class and ideological bias) and political airs of importance wholly unkeeping with the philosophical ethos of: Speaking truth to power.

    Having abjured the tradition of the Founders (pseudonymous publication i.e., The Federalis Papers) for a milk-sop, pantywaiste concept of “civility” wholly defined by a particular social class with vested economic, psychological (socialite) and political (Third Way) interests–of which Arianna represents the most flagrant example–HP has sunk itself upon the abyss of critical impotence deserving of the contempt and scorn of its once proud and vibrant social commentariate.

    Those who remain under such Suppression and ideological tyranny can’t count themselves as accomplices to everything dispicable HP has become, mere panderers to a value now lost at HP in the vain hope of having their voices heard once again among the sickening crowd of inane babblers…tantamount to receiving the Mark of the Beast on their hand (writing instrument) and forehead (thinking instrument).

    Come out from among them, and be ye separate.

  • The article’s claim that Ariannia Huffington made the decision is false
    She sold the company to AOL

    Not really a big deal though considering how bad the censorship was before. Anyone who posted thoughtful comments already left a long time ago.
    The only comments that get through now support the editorial position

  • I don’t see a viable definition of what a “troll” is here or why they pose a problem in any way other than posting anonymously which isn’t a problem by itself that would justify censorship.

  • They had a crappy puff piece today about Bill Clinton’s belief in aliens. I posted that it is a distraction and shared extremely valuable information about his past crimes. Mena, AR airport’s role in Guatemala/Iran Contra shipping Cocaine into the US and shipping illegal guns out. Named names like Barry Seal, Terry Reed, Dan Lassater, Oliver North. All the murders(100s) and suspicious deaths of “associates”. Clinton’s drug use and adultery witnessed by the St Troopers that guarded him and on and on. The Clinton’s radical pro communist politics in college. No words of vulgarity were written or racism. It was censored. F— Huff Po they are SHILL dinosaur media and they will perish before too long because nobody will give a crap what the say or trust them.

  • Their censorship is a joke. They had an article that used “dildo” in the title about fishermen who found something interesting. I commented that it was a vibrator, not a dildo, and it was immediately deleted. If you use the word “idiot” in a comment, it will be immediately deleted. Very distressing to see in a “leftist” website. The more I see of Huffington Post, the more it resembles a tabloid magazine then a news outlet.

    • I guess “moron” and “not too bright” is not in the filter. Ariana Huffpuff does not delete “Obama is a moron” comments. It is possible the filter is based on Ariana’s future run for the presidency. Since she has not yet announced her platform, we don’t know what words and phrases get filtered out.

  • While many people are in favor of gay marriage, it is a controversial subject, and you can’t post the articles that Huffington Post does without some argument. Still, if you go on a page about anything having to do with gay relationships, I
    believe you are likely to see multiple comments that agree with the
    article and it’s views, and very, very few that go against it. There was even an article about how we may need to change our views on “traditional marriage”, but not in the way you’d think: they were talking about adultery, poly-marriages, etc. And most of the comments I saw seemed in favor of those things! I do not believe this to be the way of thinking for the majority of people in America; regardless of whether you believe that marriage is between a man and a woman or two men or two women, I think most people believe that it is between TWO people. And based on my experience with the site, I believe they are censoring comments that go against , yes, liberal views, but more specifically THEIR liberal views.

    I’ve never experienced anything like this, and it gives a really distorted view of what people honestly think about various subjects.

  • I’m christian and conservative they banned me just proves that libs as they are do not approve free speech.


    HuffPo has been censoring ever since they learned what HTTP means.

    The censorship is arbitrary and capricious and entirely whim-based. It is usually based how the “mod” (user-censor) feels–alignment to political beliefs mostly, but it might even be based on whether the user-censor has digestion from the breakfast meal.

    The use of the term “Internet troll” in the context of a website that trades in political views is Orwellian newspeak at its highest. It is used as a term of derision to yell “witch! witch!” by a committee of puritans to shout down or intimidate the individual with the heretical–meaning “unpopular,” “minority,” “different”—position. It is the most execrable implementation of the fallacy argumentum ad populum to further a site agenda. Unfortunately, both sides–left and right—do it and to their shame. The justification varies from the it’s-my-ball-so-we-play-the-game-my-way type to the two-wrongs-make-a-right (“the other side does it too!”) cringing excuse.

    Any good participants in the political process that offer polite, thoughtful contributions which get unapproved (thrown into the bit bucket in an approval queue) or deleted should absolutely find other venues and tell their friends to do so as well. By polite, thoughtful contributions, I generally mean those that conform to the expectations of civil discussion: no ad hominems directed to other participants (mindless provocation), generally expletive-free discussion.

    Too many sites however clearly “edit” the discussion to show an endorsement of views in support of the blog/article writer or the politics of the site. HuffPo is an example of an (extreme) left site (I refuse to allow them to be labeled “progressive”). NPR is another site. Mediaite has (had?) an editor that was constantly banning posters who had the mildest criticism of right-wing whiner and complainer A. J. Delgado, who left that site anyway after a brief stint because she has even thinner skin than the notorious Bill O’Reilly. Oddly, I am afraid to say that I have contributed posts to extreme right sites and they are FAR LESS censorial than sites on the left. I have posted to Emmett Tyrell’s Spectator site, and no one is further right than the paramilitary boys at Spectator: they love “eating liberals.”

    I am pretty much on the left, and I am ashamed to say that many on the left use the word “tolerance” but do not know what it means. Yes, it means ugly and sometimes hateful speech. And the solution to that is not the muzzling of it, but more speech, civil, profound, and wise.

  • I have been commenting on HP for years. I got really disgusted with their capricious censorship which was/is enforced so arbitrarily and brutally that it would have made Joseph Goebbels proud.

    I responded to one story in particular when one individual professor smeared economist Paul Krugman. The smear was a personal attack and I remember the author using the disparaging term Krugman The Invincible. He went on and on in that slanderous tone. But HP violated their own terms of service by publishing a story that included a vicious personal attack and name-calling which they purportedly disallow.

    I committed the sin of pointing out HP’s hypocrisy in that story but my own comment was immediately censored and got nowhere.

    HP has a real problem with freedom of speech and an even worse problem in their overzealous self-protections that reject any and all criticism of their hypocritical posting policies.

    Now, who knows how many names they are putting into their database of personal information that may easily end up in the hands of those who will use HP as a gold mine to harm thousands of people and compromise their privacy?

  • Haha the trolls still get on to Huff post. I have been banned from posting at all, because I called them out on a downright lie one of their “reporters” had made up as revenge for being told by police to leave a dangerous place in Ferguson, MO. When he refused, the police did, somewhat manhandle him to get him out of harms way. And I saw that the “report” against another cop had been obviously altered by Huff post and they were not happy when I listed the discrepancies..

  • a ddos attack will make huffpo cut out the censorship any expert hackers know how to do it ?? i will pay you $10.000 bux if yous pull it off

  • The Huffington Post is a propaganda machine masquerading as a newspaper. It is a pulpit for liberal extremists to pat themselves on the back. The few comments I posted were deleted and they weren’t in violation of any rules. They were just polite comments that disagreed with the rabid anti-police and vicious anti-Republican agenda that the website fires up by dumping lots of fuel on fires. The slanted reporting is embarrassing but the sheep there eat it up. I thought I might meet like minded people hoping to do the right thing and I found irrational activists.

    • Ha ha. And I have figured out I am too conservative for them. I am a straight out liberal, a law and order one.

  • I don’t think they have any policy in place to let un-trolls know when and if they are banned. I find myself suddenly unable to submit any comments. I can not tell if this is for replies to a person who went on a rant against capitalism. the one who said it doesn’t make a difference which party we vote in, or the one who believes fervently in Trickle Down economics. I am not terribly pro- or anti-anything, but simply a Democrat. I did not swear etc. I have been a member for six years. I spent hours trying to re-post, fiddled with my computer, and discovered I must have been silenced because I am.

    • Same thing happened to me and a lot of other people. I am a Republican but I have wondered if it had more to do with your “likes” and “favs” on all their articles. If you like too many things or comments they don’t like, your are blocked.

      • Thank you for responding! I had not considered the role of “likes” and “favs,” but it makes sense that Huffpo moderators ban anyone whose up-voting could popularize a position that is out of step with Huffpo-think. solidarity with Huffpo-think. I did “argue” with progressive posters the last day I was allowed to comment. Unfortunately, I referred in one reply to Kucinich as “that ET looking guy.” I like him but my point is he is never going to be president and I couldn’t retrieve his name from my storage locker.. I guess when a dissenting voice has too much weight or the dissent is viewed as an attack on Huffpo- think, it’s got to be silenced. You might have had too many upvotes on your posts. In any case, it makes sense to cull the herd. Enough numbers remain to give the opposition a nod, and to rally and unify the majority against it.
        So any of us who, without violating TOS, become threats to HuffPo- think, or appear to attack Huffpo-thinkers, however we do that, are expendable, even more than in the past because FB helps HP continue to attract and retain large numbers of participants. Culling refreshes the herd, and cuts down on the over-head to maintain it. Culling makes good sense. And why should HuffPo bother notifying banned members?

        Let them remain “on the rolls.” Every link to community support is broken. There is no help desk to flood with complaint and questions.
        I am surprised that Huffpo doesn’t have the courtesy to inform its long-term members when the are expelled from the community they helped build. Actually, how long one has been a member, it is rude and unprofessional to dismiss him without warning, notification, or explanation. Certainly, a forum purporting to sponsor inclusiveness is hypocritical to disallow or under-represent conservatives.
        Finally, Huffington Post should announce in TOS that it’s an offense to blaspheme certain sacred cows, that those who favor, thus popularize, conservative posts or who, on the other hand, debate progressive-leaning posts will automatically be banned without notice.

        • I was having a hard time believing that my post was still out there after a year. LOL I don’t think HP or liberals, in general, think they are being rude. They are arrogant and believe they are right about everything they do. In my opinion, they are hypocrites. I am not so sure I got banned because of my political views but I think my views on “Illegal Aliens”, “Gay’s in the military”, foreign policy and Muslims was a larger issue. I am not exactly Politically Correct. I never broke the guidelines with my responses but if you swim upstream, against the liberal propaganda, they will gang up on you and punish you any way they can. The Liberal/Left is nothing but a bunch of whining cry babies and will use lies and Political Correctness as a club.
          If you would like to read a book about how a FB/Liberal type organization kills freedom of speech and privacy, I would recommend, “The Circle” by Dave Eggars. I’m do not feel it is a work of fiction as much as a warning about the future in this country.
          Enjoy your evening.

          • Thanks for the book reco. Love Dave Eggers. Yes, I do see political correctness as the yardstick, but I think that correctness, though rooted in progressive-think, goes beyond political identifications. It has its own rules for conservatives and liberals alike. It is the supreme deity, I will simply never worship at its altar. I don’t care what ideology it calls itself. And yes, interestingly enough, though I brought the wrath of an entire board upon me for my posts on what might be called a far-right wing forum, I was not banished! I was not censored! They called me evil, wished me dead, vehemently argued against me, taunted me, but I did not get told I could no longer participate. Ironic. And as a result I was able to credit some of that board’s consensual opinions and to re-think my own position. I was able better to qualify what I am for and not for. I was exposed to information I did not have. All conversation need not be utterly civil, it just needs to be allowed, and if someone steps out of line, they need to be told how/why, cautioned perhaps, but censorship? Only if they harass and stalk individual participants. Only if they relate how they like to buy kittens, crush their paws with a hammer, and feed them to their boa constrictor whom they later pour bleach on to burn to death. PS Yes, unfortunately a story told by a sociopath in a class I taught. Now THAT I should have censored.

            Now you enjoy YOUR evening. Thanks for reply,

            • I have found the same to be true. As far as I’m concerned, PC is just another form of bullying. How can there be honest dialog without the ability to honestly express your self? I do believe in civility however, and I detest name calling. 😎

  • I will never click on one of their articles again, I got banned for very tame comments, I simply didn’t agree with one of the stories they had, and bam, banned. Sickening liberal group think in action.

  • Ultimately, for those of us who can never post again on HuffPost:


    Thank you Lenny Bruce. Very Politically Incorrect. Reference is to a Lenny Bruce’s routine about a man who visits a Chinese restaurant all the time and enjoys talking to its owner.

    Some of you are bound to find racism in it, but as a fifth generation Californian, I love to imitate the old San Francisco accent as interpreted by my Italian-American grandmother who had graduated from vocational typing school (out of a group home) and went on to become one of the first women printers in S,F. I loved her very funny expressions, Americanisms as she translated and re-contextualized them, uttered in that accent.

    At her funeral, the priest said proudly, “And she was from Norta Bitcha!”

    You have to look that reference up too. Hint, refers to an originally predominately Italian-American neighborhood in San Francisco.

  • The reality is if you disagree with the topic then your post is deleted bottom line.
    Then, in my case, sent a complaint to Face Book which had my account locked.
    There was 100% not a single inflammatory remark other than point out the Socialism behind the agenda of the topic.

  • NPR arbitrarily censors its comment sections. They claim that any comment that doesn’t “further or serve” the article can be censored. That way any comments that point out flaws in the author’s reasoning, or even just well-reasoned opposing views, can be sent to interwebs limbo…

  • AOL/HuffyPo doesn’t even allow me to “thumbs up” an anti-Obama or anti-Michael/Michelle comment anymore…..I’ve been a BAAAAAAAD boy !

  • Here we are in 2016 and it seems like they’re not only censoring certain email newsletters that I am subscribed to (anytime I try to open a link to a story or a youtube link while logged into the AOL browser-the link will start to load and then default to a blank page) but then pretty much disrupt your service while logged into AOL. I know what the majority of people will say as far as dropping them altogether but not only am I subscribed to them but my entire family pretty much from the beginning. I guess old habits die hard but I am getting pretty sick of having to close it out and try signing in again over and over. AOL SUCKS!!! Feels like I’m living in some Iron Curtain country and am at the mercy of some AOL Ministry of Propaganda. They better knock it off because I see alot of people complaining about the same thing. Can anyone say-CLASS ACTION LAW SUIT- for denying us our First Amendment Right to Free Speech? Or did AOL forget that we still do have a Constitution. Although you wouldn’t know it having witnessed the shenanigans of the past 8 years with Executive Order after Executive Order.

  • Huffington Post censors everything they do not agree with! We are the new N.Korea and Russia…Free speech is only for the liberal elite and not the middle class hardworking Americans..Because the liberal elite knows what is best for the rest of us deplorables. We can’t spell either.

Leave a Comment