NRO does not post readers’ comments politely criticizing Muslim immigration
26, Clark Coleman forwarded to me this e-mail he had sent to National Review Online
Subject: Online comment moderation at NRO
To: National Review Online editors
I submitted a comment more than a week ago to a column by David Pryce-Jones.
My comment pointed out that the source of the conflict discussed in the column was the immigration of Muslims into Britain. No name-calling or rudeness; just a simple statement of the obvious. The comment never received approval from the moderator of online comments, apparently, as it has never appeared.
As I periodically check the comments, I find plenty of not too useful comments, including two anti-Christian comments by an online creature known as “Etch-a-Sketch Robmoney.” I suppose that anti-Christian comments that advance no conservative cause are welcome at NRO, but not comments that point out problems with immigration of Muslims into a Western society.
I would appreciate if an explanation could be provided by the “conservative” employee responsible for this moderation, or his superiors. Is there an editorial policy that permits name-calling, anti-Christian bigotry, and so on, but not criticism of immigration? Have moderators been instructed to impose such a policy?
Clark L. Coleman
LA replied (August 26):
Shall we guess the odds on your getting a reply? I’d say between a 20 and 30 percent chance.
Clark Coleman replied:
I was thinking closer to zero percent; maybe five percent. We will see.
Clark Coleman writes (September 3):
Well, eight days and no reply so far.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at September 03, 2012 12:26 PM | Send