Big Mother Is Watching You

MySpace Admits Censorship Of Prison Planet.com
Moderator says anything containing URL of website is filtered out

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Friday, May 11, 2007

In a telling slip-up, a MySpace moderator has admitted that it is MySpace.com policy to censor and filter out posts containing links to the Prison Planet.com website, adding that the MySpace server automatically blocks such information.

Earlier this week MySpace was accused of censoring information pertaining to Ron Paul’s presidential campaign but the social networking site denied the allegations and later featured Paul’s profile on their main page.

But a deliberate policy to block Prison Planet.com has been exposed after a moderator unwittingly admitted the fact that Alex Jones’ Prison Planet website is filtered out from messageboards and bulletin posts.

In a discussion thread, a MySpace user complained that his Ron Paul post had been censored, to which a MySpace moderator responded, “Ron Paul wasn’t being censored, it was the prisonplanet.com part of the message that was being filtered out.”

The moderator later clarifies that it was beyond his control and that “prisonplanet.com” is on a list of URL’s that are automatically blocked by MySpace’s servers. The screenshot can be viewed below.

To be clear, moderators are not in the employ of MySpace but are invited to monitor message threads and delete off-topic material. The filtering of prison planet.com was not an act of any moderator but forms a deliberate policy on behalf of MySpace.

The excuse given is that prison planet.com is used so many times that MySpace’s servers automatically classify it as spam and ban it - but this is neither justified or believable. We have managed multiple MySpace accounts for well over a year and continually are forced to delete the same spam advertising and assorted trash that repeatedly finds its way to our inbox and on our profile comment board.

Why is this kind of material left alone and yet prison planet is banned?

Does it have anything to do with the fact that our involvement with MySpace was born simply as a means of exposing the fact that Rupert Murdoch’s social networking giant was an orgy of censorship and a trojan horse for the introduction of Internet 2?

This followed media reports in January 2006, shortly after Neo-Con ideologue Murdoch had bought the company for $580 million, concerning the fact that MySpace was deliberately blocking URL’s from rival websites and others they simply didn’t like. When thousands complained on a messageboard, MySpace simply shut down the messageboard and pretended it was a technical error.

If MySpace and Rupert Murdoch are that frightened of websites like Prison Planet threatening the corporate interests that sustain them, as with the bury brigade at Digg, fair enough - we have no divine right to appear on your website - but don’t lie to the people and pretend you are some kind of online democracy where free speech is encouraged and permitted - because it’s simply not true.

No doubt they will also claim that the censorship of Prison Planet.com - one of the foremost Internet critics of the same gaggle of Neo-Cons that Rupert Murdoch fronts for, is just a mistake or a technicality. What do you think?

Link to PrisonPlanet article here