back to article Right-to-reply website launches

A website launches today which aims to offer "an impartial, web-based right-to-reply service". is run by a bunch of Tories, and Matthew Taylor - a former advisor to Tony Blair (so a bunch of Tories then - Ed). The site will "provide an authoritative means of publishing a full response, alert relevant bloggers …


This topic is closed for new posts.

A Canofworms for Phishers

A.N.Other bunch of Wannabe Leaders content to let the Status Quo remain unaltered whilst they peddle their own wares on top of it.

Not so much a Fix for any System but much more just another one of those parasitic Bugs to deal with.


Another propaganda outlet

Is anyone really stupid enough to believe this is anything other than another Tory propaganda outlet with a business plan a three year old could see through. It'll be "impartial" in the way Fox News calls itself "fair and balanced."

It really is designed as very clever, under the radar propaganda. The whole thing is run by Tories and profiteers which for a "impartial" news service has all the credibility of Norman Tebbitt running a refuge for single mothers.

Anonymous Coward

I can't be arsed


Sorry, can't be arsed, far too busy NOT voting.




Spin, spin, spin the wheel of justice ...

So basically, just another PR firm attempting to use the web for their astroturfing.

I particularly like the phrase "...alert relevant bloggers and other stakeholders.", that's a gem.

With 90% of the "blogosphere" being comprised of turgid, misinformed w*nk (exactly the problem we are to believe they are battling against), that should be a fairly short list.


sod phishing more like trawling

can see it now:

"please sign my online petetion ive set up here <insert link>,

i need you to provide your full address so as to prove each reply is genuine


but dont worry the systems password protected and you can edit your details"

<thank, you you have just given us your default no thought username and password, prepare to be pwned >

never mind the bollox idea that the site is, i mean what will it accomplish other than move the flaming on to more fronts?

given the mentality of most fan boy zealots the existence of a rebuttal would only confirm there cause anyway

i now wonder if that old chestnut of would you kill baby hitler should be updated, to would you kill the person who first filled up a guestbook with meaningless drivel about them selves


Our right to reply!

Some interesting comments - thank you. One of the main reasons for newscounter is how hard it is to find two sides of a media story online.

I reckon it takes about 3 times longer to find a response than an allegation. If newscounter can make it easier to do this - whilst allowing readers to judge which is more convincing - then I think we'll have served a purpose.


But who is going to bother...?

Newscounter says "One of the main reasons for newscounter is how hard it is to find two sides of a media story online."

I beg to differ! It's very easy to find two sides of a media story online, in fact you can easily find a *dozen* sides at times.

So why is anyone going to go to Newscounter and expect anything other than self-serving propaganda?


RE: Our right to reply!

"One of the main reasons for newscounter is how hard it is to find two sides of a media story online."

Presumably you mean to find -only- two sides, it's usually fairly easy to find about a gazillion different points of view on any given news story, even from outlets using the same wire services, take the Google News listing for the story involving Cannabis research from Tuesday May 01 2007. News outlets headlines for the story ramge from "Cannabis chemical curbs psychotic symptoms, study finds" in the Grauniad, through "Brain scans pinpoint cannabis mental health risk" fro Reuters, to "Even a small amount of cannabis 'triggers psychotic episodes' warn doctors" from tabloid tat purveyor The Daily Mail. Full spectrum available here there are certainly more than two sides of that story being widely reported.

"I reckon it takes about 3 times longer to find a response than an allegation."

Have you thought of simply using Google's Blog Search facility ? Oh wait, that wouldn't further your ends of making money and spreading your agenda, would it ?

What is your agenda, by the way ?


Myth of the "liberal" media

This kind of initiative coming from conservatives would, in the North American context, be bound up in the myth of the "liberal" media that right wingers perversely claim to be victims of, no matter how spinelessly the media in fact adheres to their corporate masters' dictates.

Not that they're entirely insincere. The American right has become so intolerant of debate and other quaint trappings of democracy that any departure from the party line is declared "liberal" bias.

Yet not even concentrated corporate media ownership and a cadre of ideologically groomed journalists can prevent the regular contravention and subversion of right-wing consensus, because it is reality itself that continually pounds away at the thick but crumbly bulwark of conservative self-delusion and denial.

Faith-based reality proves little defense against the continuous corrosive harm by being totally wrong about pretty much everything. Right-to-Reply won't help much either.

This topic is closed for new posts.


Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017