Crushing Comment

 As many of you, I , too, read the daily news on-line offered by our tax-payer funded media. I enjoy learning what reporters are doing and their presentations of what and how they see goings on.  Many of these show a kind of personal or professional bias the arises from the plethora of "investigative" staff who are very often free-lancers selling their "stuff" to whatever media will buy it. When this kind of "reporting" happens I feel that the reader should be informed that they are seeing a certain bias which is fostered by certain reporters who firmly believe that they have sniffed out some kind of injustice and want the world to know about it and receive money for it. All well and good, but what happens is that it lends authority to the reporter who has put itself into a very crucial and judgemental position. People say, "well, if it is written, it has to be true." And that's okay too, as long as the audience is aware of their "slant", if there be one. The media giants who buy these articles should be aware of something called democratic opinion making. I often comment on articles I read, in the area where that is made possible and also, often, I am deleted by their censorship folk. I agree that distasteful comment should be removed, but often what I comment on and how, is not distasteful even though it may present an opposing viewpoint other than the article's. I try to make my comments respectful and naturally, without the use of rude language, but with an opinion perhaps not of the reporter's. Sometimes it is what I consider a better perspective. I find it frustrating when my comment that seems just as fair as others in the string but that which takes a different stance than others that are permitted to remain. In fact, I find it downright disrespectful. Reporters ought to appreciate this. Sure, there are always differing sides or points of view in every situation regardless of how perhaps  unpopular they might be. And when commenting others are permitted to disagree. It all should be fair.  To be swiftly denied making a comment, however, tastefully presented but with a different view than the writer of the article, seems to be flying the face of what reporting is all about. A true reporter is a writer who presents a picture of what actually happened without colouring it in any way, while often reporters do the opposite and write the piece with their own take. That is not reporting, that's essaying. If not actually "essaying", it can also be a push to become popular with others who may hold the same  opinion and thus they, be recognised as a "buddy" of that philosophy. Do you see what I mean? Writing to pad up one's popularity by adding more fuel to a reporter's fire, is not challenging free thought which should always be at the bottom of every reporter's efforts. That doesn't mean one should be stirring up an audience ire, but neither should it be pandering the writer's ego by merely underlining what is a already a popular opinion. A comment on an article, ought to be welcomed and treated fairly, even  if it is an opposing viewpoint. If it is tastefully written and comes up with a unique idea, I feel another writer should welcome it. My reason is that often times I see, perhaps being older, a longer perspective than that of my own nose, one that is a considered and not something that simply underscores an already trite one. That's as stupid as counting one's"hits" on line. The hype of that trash is ugh. We all need to think critically and while perhaps opinions by non- professionals isn't important, it ought to be aired for freedom of speech and opinion's sake if nothing else.