Phil Rogers
Patron
I have been posting on Tony Ortega's Underground Bunker blog recently. Today I made a comment that was unpopular. A few of them. Tony's response was to BAN ME from commenting on his blog. Is it normal for a journalist to ban dissenting opinion on their blog? Do journalists run blogs? Is Tony a journalist or a blogger?
Review my comments below and let me know if you think these warrant being banned. None of these comments were to Tony specifically, they were responses to other commentators.
First comment
Overheard in the Freezone” looks like a way to ridicule people who believe in Scientology in contrast with focusing on the abuses of Scientology.
To each their own, and Scientology beliefs are certainly silly. But every now and then you make a post decrying the mainstream media’s lack of interest in picking up your stories. I believe the fact that you regularly ridicule Scientology and Scientologists for nothing more than what they believe in addition to occasionally covering abuses, like other journalists do, is why the mainstream media doesn’t pick up your stuff.
Straight-down-the-line journalism doesn’t ridicule, it reports. Maybe you have dug your own hole here.
Second comment
I’m sorry to rain on your ideological parade. Criticizing the abuses and deceptive practices of Scientology is legitimate journalism. Ridiculing and insulting Scientologists for what they believe goes beyond journalism. Ridiculing people who leave the church of Scientology and still believe parts of it goes even beyond that. I’m not saying it’s immoral to write about Scientology this way. I’m saying it’s not journalism. When Tony makes posts complaining that the mainstream media doesn’t pay attention to him I question why he doesn’t understand why. If a mainline journalist started a segment about “silly things I heard a Baptist say this week” (or any belief-group at all) they would be fired immediately. No media outlets want to be associated with that kind of bigoted writing.
Third comment
The basis of abuse is the contradictory doctrines and silly practices? So then you are saying there is abuse in the independent field similar to within the church of Scientology?
Tony could create a segment about crazy things said in the church of Scientology but he chose to make the segment about the Freezone.
This shows Tony isn’t just interested in calling out abuses in the church of Scientology. He is equally interested in ridiculing anyone who believes in Scientology even outside of the church where such abuses don’t exist.
Tony is just ridiculing people for what they believe. When it comes to a subject that has to do with spirituality and immortality any lazy bigoted person could create a blog doing the exact same thing to Christians or Jews or Muslims or any other religious group. You think it’s OK to do it to Scientologists because you think what they believe is uniquely silly. That’s what makes it bigoted. Do you think Christianity or Judaism or Islam are more believable than Scientology? That’s just silly. They are all equally silly. But would you support a blog that treated Christianity or Judaism the way Tony has chosen to treat independent Scientology? Again, you don’t care because you don’t like Scientologists.
This is what separates Tony from journalists who write about the subject. The journalists who write about Scientology might think Scientology is just a bunch of silly kooks but they wouldn’t write about it that way because they are journalists.
Fourth comment
I agree with you. I think Faith is silly. To me the local pastor or even Jesus is just another guru. But I think we all know Tony would be eviscerated if he did a segment about silly things Christians or Jews say. People around here put up with it because people around here don’t like Scientologists. The fact that there are a lot of abuses within the church of Scientology provides a legitimate reason to criticize, and then those who simply don’t like Scientologists piggyback on top of that to ridicule even independent Scientologists, where no such abuses exist. Unfortunately this blog and the comments section is a melting pot of those who object to abuse, and those who just like to be bigoted against people for what they believe.
Review my comments below and let me know if you think these warrant being banned. None of these comments were to Tony specifically, they were responses to other commentators.
First comment
Overheard in the Freezone” looks like a way to ridicule people who believe in Scientology in contrast with focusing on the abuses of Scientology.
To each their own, and Scientology beliefs are certainly silly. But every now and then you make a post decrying the mainstream media’s lack of interest in picking up your stories. I believe the fact that you regularly ridicule Scientology and Scientologists for nothing more than what they believe in addition to occasionally covering abuses, like other journalists do, is why the mainstream media doesn’t pick up your stuff.
Straight-down-the-line journalism doesn’t ridicule, it reports. Maybe you have dug your own hole here.
Second comment
I’m sorry to rain on your ideological parade. Criticizing the abuses and deceptive practices of Scientology is legitimate journalism. Ridiculing and insulting Scientologists for what they believe goes beyond journalism. Ridiculing people who leave the church of Scientology and still believe parts of it goes even beyond that. I’m not saying it’s immoral to write about Scientology this way. I’m saying it’s not journalism. When Tony makes posts complaining that the mainstream media doesn’t pay attention to him I question why he doesn’t understand why. If a mainline journalist started a segment about “silly things I heard a Baptist say this week” (or any belief-group at all) they would be fired immediately. No media outlets want to be associated with that kind of bigoted writing.
Third comment
The basis of abuse is the contradictory doctrines and silly practices? So then you are saying there is abuse in the independent field similar to within the church of Scientology?
Tony could create a segment about crazy things said in the church of Scientology but he chose to make the segment about the Freezone.
This shows Tony isn’t just interested in calling out abuses in the church of Scientology. He is equally interested in ridiculing anyone who believes in Scientology even outside of the church where such abuses don’t exist.
Tony is just ridiculing people for what they believe. When it comes to a subject that has to do with spirituality and immortality any lazy bigoted person could create a blog doing the exact same thing to Christians or Jews or Muslims or any other religious group. You think it’s OK to do it to Scientologists because you think what they believe is uniquely silly. That’s what makes it bigoted. Do you think Christianity or Judaism or Islam are more believable than Scientology? That’s just silly. They are all equally silly. But would you support a blog that treated Christianity or Judaism the way Tony has chosen to treat independent Scientology? Again, you don’t care because you don’t like Scientologists.
This is what separates Tony from journalists who write about the subject. The journalists who write about Scientology might think Scientology is just a bunch of silly kooks but they wouldn’t write about it that way because they are journalists.
Fourth comment
I agree with you. I think Faith is silly. To me the local pastor or even Jesus is just another guru. But I think we all know Tony would be eviscerated if he did a segment about silly things Christians or Jews say. People around here put up with it because people around here don’t like Scientologists. The fact that there are a lot of abuses within the church of Scientology provides a legitimate reason to criticize, and then those who simply don’t like Scientologists piggyback on top of that to ridicule even independent Scientologists, where no such abuses exist. Unfortunately this blog and the comments section is a melting pot of those who object to abuse, and those who just like to be bigoted against people for what they believe.
