SO, IS THAT it for now? I have just listened to Gordon Brown playing fast and loose with the language in answering the latest salvo from David Cameron about his fall-out with Wendy Alexander. He again answered by denying that anyone was calling for early legislation at Westminster, something no-one has called for, but he also appeared to say the same about Holyrood, which seems odd given that a White Paper has already been published on that very subject.
The issue will probably fizzle out at Westminster now and at Holyrood there appears today to be some relief in Labour ranks that the horrors of the last ten days appear to have subsided.
Certainly the body language yesterday was very telling. MSPs sneaking out of their group meeting early by the back door; some, including the chief whip, slipping out through the empty main chamber to avoid the waiting media corps; Ms Alexander leaving in a phalanx of colleagues, like the Olympic torch-bearer surround by Chinese security guards; and Duncan McNeill pursued through the parliamentary complex by journalists and TV crews.
Such statements as were forthcoming raised more questions than they answered. At one point Mr McNeil, asked by me to clarify where things stood, stormed: “Go along and see the SNP press office and you will find out exactly what to make of it.”
I think this was a sarcastic observation implying that some journalists take their lead too often from the SNP, but if Labour leave things hopelessly confused, it is hardly the fault of journalists. Politics, like nature, abhors a vacuum and the Nationalists are never slow to rush in.
In the febrile atmosphere of last Friday the cancellation of a constituency engagement by Ms Alexander led to a rumour sweeping round that she might be poised to resign. A group of journalists received a mobile phone call from a senior aide to the SNP government to say there was no truth in the rumour. “I wish the Labour press had been in a position to tell us that,” said one of the journalists present.
Today Labour is holding a lunchtime briefing to castigate the SNP's policies on tackling poverty. It's a serious subject but on a day when Alex Salmond is making a major statement to the chamber and the newspapers are stuffed with news from a sporting event in Manchester?
It is often said that post-devolution Scotland and England pay less attention to eachother in the media. Part of the reason for this is that we can't see what the London editions of many newspapers are saying, while in London they are unaware what the Scottish editions are carrying.
I was curious to know how much space the London editions were devoting to the EUFA cup final, so I turned to the Guardian, one of the few papers that does not editionise in this way. The “puff” along the top was about a free Cat Stevens songbook, the main stories were Brown's tax cut and the Chinese earthquake, and at the bottom right hand corner of the front page was news of the main sports story of the day: Luton transfers: one FA charge dropped.
Posts on some politics stories were suspended because of persistent abuse, but it is still possible for readers to air their views on the Herald Forum section of the website which can be found under Main Sections on the Herald homepage or directly at “forum.theherald.co.uk”. Our website is about to be revamped, and the whole issue of reader engagement is being looked at.
Thanks Robbie
Wondered about the censorship.
I've cut and pasted - and sometimes adapted - selections from an on-line satirical rag.
I know that some e-correspondents (exiled aussie) haven't liked the "below the belt" commentary and suggested it should be banned. However, that would mean banning Rory Bremner, Have I got News, Private Eye, and the new cartoon series on ITV.
I hope that I've not been responsible for any censorship. I would hope to receive an email from the Herald to let me know that I was offending the sensitive readership.
As an example of the cut and pastes, here is an extract from the Daily Mash:
[quote][italic][bold]HANG ON, THIS ISN’T MAJORCA, SAY ANGRY PANDAS
A PAIR of giant Pandas who arrived in Scotland this week have claimed they were duped after being promised a fortnight in Majorca.
Chi Chi and Cha Cha said they only agreed to leave China after officials offered them a two-week stay in a seaside apartment in the picturesque village of Deia.
However, once on the plane they learned that instead of going to the beautiful Balearic island they were being sent 'on loan' to Edinburgh zoo for ten years.
Chi Chi said: "Who are these people? I've spent all my life in rural China and I've never seen such poverty and bad teeth. And I can't understand a bloody word.
"We were promised a fortnight of snorkelling, and our own hire car. We end up living in a hole in the ground, surrounded by our own mess.[/bold][/itaSlainte Mhor
Thanks Robbie
Wondered about the censorship.
I've cut and pasted - and sometimes adapted - selections from an on-line satirical rag.
I know that some e-correspondents (exiled aussie) haven't liked the "below the belt" commentary and suggested it should be banned. However, that would mean banning Rory Bremner, Have I got News, Private Eye, and the new cartoon series on ITV.
I hope that I've not been responsible for any censorship. I would hope to receive an email from the Herald to let me know that I was offending the sensitive readership.
As an example of the cut and pastes, here is an extract from the Daily Mash:
HANG ON, THIS ISN’T MAJORCA, SAY ANGRY PANDAS
A PAIR of giant Pandas who arrived in Scotland this week have claimed they were duped after being promised a fortnight in Majorca.
Chi Chi and Cha Cha said they only agreed to leave China after officials offered them a two-week stay in a seaside apartment in the picturesque village of Deia.
However, once on the plane they learned that instead of going to the beautiful Balearic island they were being sent 'on loan' to Edinburgh zoo for ten years.
Chi Chi said: "Who are these people? I've spent all my life in rural China and I've never seen such poverty and bad teeth. And I can't understand a bloody word.
"We were promised a fortnight of snorkelling, and our own hire car. We end up living in a hole in the ground, surrounded by our own mess.[/itaSlainte Mhor
well its nice to be told what the problem is, though it doesn't make sense to allow comments on one and not others (unless the persistent abuse was about labour and brown/alexander). Surely the herald have the technical knowhow to remove offensive posts.
[quote]Such statements as were forthcoming raised more questions than they answered. At one point Mr McNeil, asked by me to clarify where things stood, stormed: “Go along and see the SNP press office and you will find out exactly what to make of it.”[/quote]
Had a little chuckle to myself when i read that. Who exactly is McNeil trying to kid does he read the papers at all? The only reason most papers are being so down on wendy is because she is endangering their beloved union. I wouldn't like to have seen alan cochrane getting his hands on wendy at any point this week (ok thats a lie i would pay to see that)
Are we any clearer on the members of the Scottish Parliament's Labour group's position on a referendum btw. My understanding as of 3.40pm today is that there are no blank cheques, and they will either back/wont back/abtain on any referendum.
Oh and i spose i'd better say good luck to rangers tonight (through gritted teeth lol) i won't really mean it but i spose it is nice to be nice (ish)
well its nice to be told what the problem is, though it doesn't make sense to allow comments on one and not others (unless the persistent abuse was about labour and brown/alexander). Surely the herald have the technical knowhow to remove offensive posts.
Such statements as were forthcoming raised more questions than they answered. At one point Mr McNeil, asked by me to clarify where things stood, stormed: “Go along and see the SNP press office and you will find out exactly what to make of it.”
Had a little chuckle to myself when i read that. Who exactly is McNeil trying to kid does he read the papers at all? The only reason most papers are being so down on wendy is because she is endangering their beloved union. I wouldn't like to have seen alan cochrane getting his hands on wendy at any point this week (ok thats a lie i would pay to see that)
Are we any clearer on the members of the Scottish Parliament's Labour group's position on a referendum btw. My understanding as of 3.40pm today is that there are no blank cheques, and they will either back/wont back/abtain on any referendum.
Oh and i spose i'd better say good luck to rangers tonight (through gritted teeth lol) i won't really mean it but i spose it is nice to be nice (ish)
Some suggestions for engaging with the readers re comments are maybe numbering posts, deleting offensive posts rather than whole threads, banning persistent offenders (not me coz i'm nice to everyone and never mean)
Some suggestions for engaging with the readers re comments are maybe numbering posts, deleting offensive posts rather than whole threads, banning persistent offenders (not me coz i'm nice to everyone and never mean)
Posted by: Grassy Knollington at 9:47pm on Wed 14 May 08
"Posts on some politics stories were suspended because of persistent abuse,"
along the lines of what on earth has got into Wendy Alexander, has she gone mad?
As they say on Father Ted and apparently in Labour supporting newspapers, "Down with that sort of thing."
"Posts on some politics stories were suspended because of persistent abuse,"
along the lines of what on earth has got into Wendy Alexander, has she gone mad?
As they say on Father Ted and apparently in Labour supporting newspapers, "Down with that sort of thing."
[quote]Posts on some politics stories were suspended because of persistent abuse...[/quote] That's odd Robbie because they appeared to be turned off from the start and the usual posters on this site didn't appear to be any more abusive or mannerly than usual on the stories with comments allowed.
To be honest I'm fed up of a site which selectively turns off comments depending on what the story is. You do have editorial control of the comments remember? You can just delete the comments that are abusive or ban certain posters if it comes to that. All the interesting, (i.e. politically sensitive to Labour stories), have had the comments switched off.
I think Wendy and her desperate attempts to bounce Alex and Broon into an early referendum were put off limits because it was a political car crash rather than because of abuse and it was laughter not abuse that was the root cause of the loss of comments.
If you believe that it was because of abuse then that's fine but you're just fooling yourself not us.
[quote]Our website is about to be revamped, and the whole issue of reader engagement is being looked at.[/quote] Is that code for, "we're going to switch the bugg3rs off"? You're half way there already. You're loss mate, there are plenty of other political and news blogs out there for us "internet vermin" on the web and they don't care if you like Labour or not. For me the Herald is just another site. Your advertising revenue is going to take a serious hit if we all leave.
Posts on some politics stories were suspended because of persistent abuse...
That's odd Robbie because they appeared to be turned off from the start and the usual posters on this site didn't appear to be any more abusive or mannerly than usual on the stories with comments allowed.
To be honest I'm fed up of a site which selectively turns off comments depending on what the story is. You do have editorial control of the comments remember? You can just delete the comments that are abusive or ban certain posters if it comes to that. All the interesting, (i.e. politically sensitive to Labour stories), have had the comments switched off.
I think Wendy and her desperate attempts to bounce Alex and Broon into an early referendum were put off limits because it was a political car crash rather than because of abuse and it was laughter not abuse that was the root cause of the loss of comments.
If you believe that it was because of abuse then that's fine but you're just fooling yourself not us.
Our website is about to be revamped, and the whole issue of reader engagement is being looked at.
Is that code for, "we're going to switch the bugg3rs off"? You're half way there already. You're loss mate, there are plenty of other political and news blogs out there for us "internet vermin" on the web and they don't care if you like Labour or not. For me the Herald is just another site. Your advertising revenue is going to take a serious hit if we all leave.
Posted by: iain morrison at 10:13am on Thu 15 May 08
"Posts on some politics stories were suspended because of persistent abuse, but it is still possible for readers to air their views on the Herald Forum section of the website which can be found under Main Sections on the Herald homepage or directly at “forum.theherald.co.uk”. Our website is about to be revamped, and the whole issue of reader engagement is being looked at."
The Herald editorial staff must be very sensitive - while some of the comments on this site may be robust, they are positivly restrained, polite, less abusive, and much funnier than the bulk of those published on equilvalant English (Torygraph, Times, Gaurdian and Independent) sites. How the Herald would deal with the pro BNP racist diatribe that is swamping its English counterparts would be most interesting.
Censorship is not the answer as public abuse in this sort of forum (If such it is) rarely benifits the abuser (Extracing the urine is a different matter). The Herald should encourage (even champion) freedom of speach not restrict it and look outside its own four walls and appriciate more the quality of comment and indeed readership you attract, before you loose your entire source of business it does not pay to patronise your customers.
May I suggest you try reading some of the post English and Welsh local election postings in the Independent, which are full of either excuses for or understanding of BNP voters. As to abuse you could take time to read just a little of the anti-Scottish abuse in all the English forums (I don't see an equivelant mirror image in the Herald). After this exercise I think you may actually grow to appreciate the quality of debate, both Unionist and Nationalist you have been generating. This is not to say you will not attract the occasional moronic comment - but does that stop you reporting politicians and it does us good to remember one persons moron is anothers political genius.
PS Before you revamp your web site it you would do well to remember that it is still the best news web site in Scotland and the maxim if its aint broke don't fix it, should be somewhere near the front of your mind.
"Posts on some politics stories were suspended because of persistent abuse, but it is still possible for readers to air their views on the Herald Forum section of the website which can be found under Main Sections on the Herald homepage or directly at “forum.theherald.co.uk”. Our website is about to be revamped, and the whole issue of reader engagement is being looked at."
The Herald editorial staff must be very sensitive - while some of the comments on this site may be robust, they are positivly restrained, polite, less abusive, and much funnier than the bulk of those published on equilvalant English (Torygraph, Times, Gaurdian and Independent) sites. How the Herald would deal with the pro BNP racist diatribe that is swamping its English counterparts would be most interesting.
Censorship is not the answer as public abuse in this sort of forum (If such it is) rarely benifits the abuser (Extracing the urine is a different matter). The Herald should encourage (even champion) freedom of speach not restrict it and look outside its own four walls and appriciate more the quality of comment and indeed readership you attract, before you loose your entire source of business it does not pay to patronise your customers.
May I suggest you try reading some of the post English and Welsh local election postings in the Independent, which are full of either excuses for or understanding of BNP voters. As to abuse you could take time to read just a little of the anti-Scottish abuse in all the English forums (I don't see an equivelant mirror image in the Herald). After this exercise I think you may actually grow to appreciate the quality of debate, both Unionist and Nationalist you have been generating. This is not to say you will not attract the occasional moronic comment - but does that stop you reporting politicians and it does us good to remember one persons moron is anothers political genius.
PS Before you revamp your web site it you would do well to remember that it is still the best news web site in Scotland and the maxim if its aint broke don't fix it, should be somewhere near the front of your mind.
Posted by: George Laird at 4:35pm on Thu 15 May 08
[quote][bold]DougtheDug[/bold] wrote:
[quote]Posts on some politics stories were suspended because of persistent abuse...[/quote] That's odd Robbie because they appeared to be turned off from the start and the usual posters on this site didn't appear to be any more abusive or mannerly than usual on the stories with comments allowed. To be honest I'm fed up of a site which selectively turns off comments depending on what the story is. You do have editorial control of the comments remember? You can just delete the comments that are abusive or ban certain posters if it comes to that. All the interesting, (i.e. politically sensitive to Labour stories), have had the comments switched off. I think Wendy and her desperate attempts to bounce Alex and Broon into an early referendum were put off limits because it was a political car crash rather than because of abuse and it was laughter not abuse that was the root cause of the loss of comments. If you believe that it was because of abuse then that's fine but you're just fooling yourself not us. [quote]Our website is about to be revamped, and the whole issue of reader engagement is being looked at.[/quote] Is that code for, "we're going to switch the bugg3rs off"? You're half way there already. You're loss mate, there are plenty of other political and news blogs out there for us "internet vermin" on the web and they don't care if you like Labour or not. For me the Herald is just another site. Your advertising revenue is going to take a serious hit if we all leave.[/quote] Dear Doug the dug
I have to agree with you that the bloggers some of whom can be robust can also be offensive.
I have been robust myself from time to time and have responded to people who were offensive to me as well in the same manner.
The Herald should remember that the bloggers on here shape opinion which the Herald staff can never do. For example when Lord Foulkes mentioned the comments section on Newsnight that probably attracted other people to view.
As for the Herald in general, it has ditched it's claim to be Scotland's voice and is more like New Labour Central polit bureau news sheet.
I suspect that because New Labour is in the toilet that it wishes to close comments down to help Labour regain an agenda.
To Charles McGhee if you are going to close comments then have the balls to state the real reason and let us have no more talk about "revamping" which is really a load of crap.
The bloggers will move to the Scotsman and you will lose money and influence because some stories on here are about as interesting as watching paint dry.
You may think you change opinion but the reality is you don't, that is because your paper doesn't have the balls to stand for the people of Scotland.
Having read the Herald for some time I have noticed a theme, the Herald only gets "bolshie" at soft targets and well after a witch hunt has begun.
Hardly Scotland's leading quality paper setting the moral agenda is it?
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
DougtheDug wrote:
Posts on some politics stories were suspended because of persistent abuse...
That's odd Robbie because they appeared to be turned off from the start and the usual posters on this site didn't appear to be any more abusive or mannerly than usual on the stories with comments allowed. To be honest I'm fed up of a site which selectively turns off comments depending on what the story is. You do have editorial control of the comments remember? You can just delete the comments that are abusive or ban certain posters if it comes to that. All the interesting, (i.e. politically sensitive to Labour stories), have had the comments switched off. I think Wendy and her desperate attempts to bounce Alex and Broon into an early referendum were put off limits because it was a political car crash rather than because of abuse and it was laughter not abuse that was the root cause of the loss of comments. If you believe that it was because of abuse then that's fine but you're just fooling yourself not us.
Our website is about to be revamped, and the whole issue of reader engagement is being looked at.
Is that code for, "we're going to switch the bugg3rs off"? You're half way there already. You're loss mate, there are plenty of other political and news blogs out there for us "internet vermin" on the web and they don't care if you like Labour or not. For me the Herald is just another site. Your advertising revenue is going to take a serious hit if we all leave.
Dear Doug the dug
I have to agree with you that the bloggers some of whom can be robust can also be offensive.
I have been robust myself from time to time and have responded to people who were offensive to me as well in the same manner.
The Herald should remember that the bloggers on here shape opinion which the Herald staff can never do. For example when Lord Foulkes mentioned the comments section on Newsnight that probably attracted other people to view.
As for the Herald in general, it has ditched it's claim to be Scotland's voice and is more like New Labour Central polit bureau news sheet.
I suspect that because New Labour is in the toilet that it wishes to close comments down to help Labour regain an agenda.
To Charles McGhee if you are going to close comments then have the balls to state the real reason and let us have no more talk about "revamping" which is really a load of crap.
The bloggers will move to the Scotsman and you will lose money and influence because some stories on here are about as interesting as watching paint dry.
You may think you change opinion but the reality is you don't, that is because your paper doesn't have the balls to stand for the people of Scotland.
Having read the Herald for some time I have noticed a theme, the Herald only gets "bolshie" at soft targets and well after a witch hunt has begun.
Hardly Scotland's leading quality paper setting the moral agenda is it?
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
I do not as a rule comment on this intranet thing I am a silent silver surfer. I do like to read the comments sometimes they are most informative. My The reason for commenting today with the help of my grandson is that I am what some of the commenter’s would call a unionist. My grandson gave me this computer so that I could still read the herald even with my poor eyesight. I am always frightened I am going to do something terribly wrong with it. After reading the debacle over comments I have now changed my allegiance somewhat and would now be classified one of these Nats. I enjoy the comments. There is some low comments {from both sides} but much of what is written is no different to what you hear among friends. I often pondered with amusement the Nat claims of bias in the newspapers towards the snp but having witnessed myself the blocking of comments towards wendy Alexander’s misfortune which really was quite her own fault then I have to concur with the Nats. This blocking of comments on websites was not something I witnessed previous to the election of a Nationalist government. Now that I have moved quite substantially to this position it does make me question the validity and indeed honesty of the comments and newspaper commentary I have believed in the past. I have seen many things in my 76ears and this will be my first and last foray into the comments section. I bid you all goodnight and goodbye
I do not as a rule comment on this intranet thing I am a silent silver surfer. I do like to read the comments sometimes they are most informative. My The reason for commenting today with the help of my grandson is that I am what some of the commenter’s would call a unionist. My grandson gave me this computer so that I could still read the herald even with my poor eyesight. I am always frightened I am going to do something terribly wrong with it. After reading the debacle over comments I have now changed my allegiance somewhat and would now be classified one of these Nats. I enjoy the comments. There is some low comments {from both sides} but much of what is written is no different to what you hear among friends. I often pondered with amusement the Nat claims of bias in the newspapers towards the snp but having witnessed myself the blocking of comments towards wendy Alexander’s misfortune which really was quite her own fault then I have to concur with the Nats. This blocking of comments on websites was not something I witnessed previous to the election of a Nationalist government. Now that I have moved quite substantially to this position it does make me question the validity and indeed honesty of the comments and newspaper commentary I have believed in the past. I have seen many things in my 76ears and this will be my first and last foray into the comments section. I bid you all goodnight and goodbye
Posted by: George Laird at 7:31pm on Thu 15 May 08
[quote][bold]granjean[/bold] wrote:
I do not as a rule comment on this intranet thing I am a silent silver surfer. I do like to read the comments sometimes they are most informative. My The reason for commenting today with the help of my grandson is that I am what some of the commenter’s would call a unionist. My grandson gave me this computer so that I could still read the herald even with my poor eyesight. I am always frightened I am going to do something terribly wrong with it. After reading the debacle over comments I have now changed my allegiance somewhat and would now be classified one of these Nats. I enjoy the comments. There is some low comments {from both sides} but much of what is written is no different to what you hear among friends. I often pondered with amusement the Nat claims of bias in the newspapers towards the snp but having witnessed myself the blocking of comments towards wendy Alexander’s misfortune which really was quite her own fault then I have to concur with the Nats. This blocking of comments on websites was not something I witnessed previous to the election of a Nationalist government. Now that I have moved quite substantially to this position it does make me question the validity and indeed honesty of the comments and newspaper commentary I have believed in the past. I have seen many things in my 76ears and this will be my first and last foray into the comments section. I bid you all goodnight and goodbye[/quote] Dear Jean
Well said that granny!
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
granjean wrote:
I do not as a rule comment on this intranet thing I am a silent silver surfer. I do like to read the comments sometimes they are most informative. My The reason for commenting today with the help of my grandson is that I am what some of the commenter’s would call a unionist. My grandson gave me this computer so that I could still read the herald even with my poor eyesight. I am always frightened I am going to do something terribly wrong with it. After reading the debacle over comments I have now changed my allegiance somewhat and would now be classified one of these Nats. I enjoy the comments. There is some low comments {from both sides} but much of what is written is no different to what you hear among friends. I often pondered with amusement the Nat claims of bias in the newspapers towards the snp but having witnessed myself the blocking of comments towards wendy Alexander’s misfortune which really was quite her own fault then I have to concur with the Nats. This blocking of comments on websites was not something I witnessed previous to the election of a Nationalist government. Now that I have moved quite substantially to this position it does make me question the validity and indeed honesty of the comments and newspaper commentary I have believed in the past. I have seen many things in my 76ears and this will be my first and last foray into the comments section. I bid you all goodnight and goodbye
Dear Jean
Well said that granny!
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
Interesting little show on Radio Scotland today about the crisis in the Scottish newspaper industry, called "What the Papers Don't Say". No-one in the industry seems willing to address the elephant in the room: that the editorial line of most Scottish papers is contributing to their own demise. An independent Scotland would require its own healthy newspapers, to report and scrutinise government and the other estates. The Irish equivalents of the Herald and Scotsman outsell them by over 2 to 1 (in a smaller country!), because, with their own dedicated staff, they can provide coverage of Irish affairs in a way that one journo providing fillers for an "Irish edition" of the London Times could never do. Yet by continuing to (slavishly) support the Union, the Herald and Scotsman not merely invite such competition, they nurture it.
Now that one big source of advertising revenue - local authority recruitment - is about to disappear for the Herald and Scotsman, what are they going to do to boost their circulation? I know people who only buy both papers on a Friday for the jobs bit. They won't any more. Myself, I only buy the Saturday Herald, I'll be stopping that soon because of the increasingly ludicrous biased editorial line. Last week's "Cameron-Salmond pact" headline was the last straw for me.
Interesting little show on Radio Scotland today about the crisis in the Scottish newspaper industry, called "What the Papers Don't Say". No-one in the industry seems willing to address the elephant in the room: that the editorial line of most Scottish papers is contributing to their own demise. An independent Scotland would require its own healthy newspapers, to report and scrutinise government and the other estates. The Irish equivalents of the Herald and Scotsman outsell them by over 2 to 1 (in a smaller country!), because, with their own dedicated staff, they can provide coverage of Irish affairs in a way that one journo providing fillers for an "Irish edition" of the London Times could never do. Yet by continuing to (slavishly) support the Union, the Herald and Scotsman not merely invite such competition, they nurture it.
Now that one big source of advertising revenue - local authority recruitment - is about to disappear for the Herald and Scotsman, what are they going to do to boost their circulation? I know people who only buy both papers on a Friday for the jobs bit. They won't any more. Myself, I only buy the Saturday Herald, I'll be stopping that soon because of the increasingly ludicrous biased editorial line. Last week's "Cameron-Salmond pact" headline was the last straw for me.
[quote]Posts on some politics stories were suspended because of persistent abuse[/quote]
Robbie, thanks for atleast giving us some indication of the reasons behind the censorship of comments, but why just Scottish Poltiical stories, why not UK ones.
Can you confirm whether it is Scottish Labour who have complained about the forums or was specific individuals.
This needs to be sorted out.
The online forums are where matters are truly discussed and debated, it is where we cna link to governemnt information and cross - refer information not always included in the herald's stories (no names mentioned).
I'm afraod that on this occasion, the herald's response, through your blog (I recall it was you who told us the reasons the last time this happend) is unacceoptable.
Surely it must be simplier to log IP Addresses and simply ban them after repeated discretions.
Posts on some politics stories were suspended because of persistent abuse
Robbie, thanks for atleast giving us some indication of the reasons behind the censorship of comments, but why just Scottish Poltiical stories, why not UK ones.
Can you confirm whether it is Scottish Labour who have complained about the forums or was specific individuals.
This needs to be sorted out.
The online forums are where matters are truly discussed and debated, it is where we cna link to governemnt information and cross - refer information not always included in the herald's stories (no names mentioned).
I'm afraod that on this occasion, the herald's response, through your blog (I recall it was you who told us the reasons the last time this happend) is unacceoptable.
Surely it must be simplier to log IP Addresses and simply ban them after repeated discretions.
Politics
