I do not like censorship. I believe that free speech, within certain limits, is an integral part of any democratic nation. That said, I struggled last week with a decision to moderate comments from a couple of readers. One such reader has been disrespectful to other readers, and both promote blatant lies and conspiracy theories in their comments. I did not make that decision lightly nor happily, but after much inner debate (those conversations between me, myself, and I sometimes get volatile!), I decided it was the right thing to do. I am obviously not alone in making this decision, as fellow blogger Diane Ravitch writes in her latest post. Thanks, also, to Bob Shepherd for pointing me to Ms. Ravitch’s blog!
As regular readers know, I have received and posted several comments complaining that I don’t write posts showing “both sides” or “different sides” on Ukraine. They disapprove of my support for Ukraine and my criticism of Putin.
In some cases, the commenters have included links to articles or videos claiming that Putin had no choice but to invade Ukraine because…he felt encircled by NATO, or he needed to protect Russians in Ukraine, or Ukraine is overrun by Nazis, or some policy analyst warned that NATO’s expansion would provoke Putin. Other commenters claim that I should not post anything sympathetic to Ukraine unless I post equally sympathetic commentaries about places where the U.S. brutalized the local population or where other nations are suffering.
Let me explain. This is my blog. It is not CNN, FOX, MSNBC, or a network station. The articles I post are my choice.
My choice is to…
View original post 553 more words