[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
696: Taking over the Corbett list????
>From Bob Corbett:
Folks, below is an excerpt from a private note I got yesterday,
but it is typical of quite a few similar such notes I have
gotten recently. The gist is that Corbettland is in danger
of being compromised by groups that organize to push their own
points of view and not just personal care and work, but with funding
that allows them to work at a different level of power.
The correspondent says this:
"I am a consumer of information and I get a lot from
Corbettland. I am not really quite sure how to say this, but I am worried
about the effect that a political organization with a lot of money to
could have on a free forum like the Corbett list. There have always been
some prolific posters, such as Poincy, Simidor, Chamberlain, Gray, and
others. These are each people who take time out of his or her personal
to contribute. There have also been professional organizations and paid
propagandists who make occasional contributions. It is hard to put my
finger on exactly what seems different now, but I find myself wondering
much money one would have to spend to effectively command the discourse
among intellectuals in this country regarding Haiti. We know that
"disinformation"; the process of strategically manipulating what is said
the press has been a tool of organizations in many governments. Could
Corbettland be a target?"
Since I have heard this view quite often of late I decided to post this
note and solicit replies from others of you who might be concerned about
this issue. I have no intention of posting these advisory notes to the
list, since I am not turning this issue over to the group for a community
decision. This is a moderated list and I have the responsibility of
moderation. I will, however, listen to all who have things to say about
this issue (or other concerns you have about the list itself).
My own tendency is not to take this as a serious issue. When one opens
each post at the top of every post is the name of the person who sent it
in with the exception of the few anonymous posts we get. It would seem
that I am the ONLY person who has any obligation to read every post, since
I have the moderator's obligation. I know from many of you that there are
people whose views you don't want to bother with, so when you see a
certain name at the top you simply hit the delete button. This seems a
reasonable thing to do and responsible. One takes the power and
responsibility to pick and choose among those who offer items and views on
I read a large number of newspapers on line and do the same thing. I see
headlines and journalists and I pick and choose what I want to read.
I'm curious as to why this is not an adequate safeguard to being somehow
coopted by those who may flood the list with their own views?
At any rate, I am open to hear from any of you who are concerned about
this issue or any other issues regarding the list itself and list
procedures and policies.
Thanks, Bob Corbett