I do not remember how long I’ve been reading Gates of Vienna. I do not do it daily, but I use to accumulate a number of posts to print so I could read them comfortably; that is also why I do not use to comment nor participate in the debates. I have also linked GoV very frequently in my own blog; as a matter of fact, in the Spanish skirmishes of the former controversy after the Counter Jihad in Brussels, I was blamed for using mostly GoV as the source for my arguments. Now, since a few months I have contributed with several posts to GoV.
I am also a regular reader of Pajamas Media (PJM). I remember when it was created because it forced the outing of Barcepundit, who is probably the Spanish blogger best known in the anglosphere.
Pajamas has changed a lot since then: more info, more authoritative comment, and more appealing design. In brief, it has become a professional-quality media. Their motto is, nevertheless, the same: Sending the MSM down the river… It could be considered a little bit arrogant, but still legitimate, of course.
Under these circumstances, I was very surprised to read the news that GoV had been summarily ejected from the Pajamas group of blogs. That is, no explanation was given, but I could understand that it was because of the controversial post.
I have contacted Pajamas but got no answer, and neither GoV seems to have got an explanation. As a contributor, I want to make public that I support my hosts at Gates of Vienna.
I have started to investigate on my own here and there. I have tried to find some kind of a foundational manifesto by PJM, but there is not one, and the archive functions do not work as expected. I have found a number of articles from those initial days, but they were not what I expected.
- This one (A one-stop shop for the ‘best’ blogs) makes a couple of references to the higher advertising revenues of a joint approach to blogging, and a pretence to have not only conservative opinion but to encompass the complete political spectrum.
- This one (Three Political Web Logs Make a Run for the Mainstream) refers also to revenues and to the world-wide, round the clock possibility of a chain of bloggers.
- And again, this one (Will Pajamas Media Wake Up Blogs?) refers to the world-wide approach and to the encompassing approach to opinion:
Simon, however, stresses that Pajamas Media has no ideological leanings and that the group is trying to attract contributors from all over the political spectrum. “It’s not about right or left, it’s a different model,” Simon said. “There will be 70 different people with 70 different views.”
Well, now they are 69. I found also this recent article with and appealing title (John Wayne of blogosphere). I wondered which of those John Wayne values that the author wanted to emphasise in Mr. Simon. Independence? Courage? Well, they only thing I find, again, is concern for PJM’s business model:
In this Wild West online frontier, Mr. Simon might as well be John Wayne.
Along with Mr. Johnson and others, Mr. Simon founded PJM in 2005 in an effort, he said, to “monetize” the often unruly Internet world, where hundreds of thousands of readers each day go online to read and comment on the news, analysis and humour that arrive filtered through distinct personal perspectives.
The interview finishes with a contradictory statement on the dificulty of getting revenues from advertisers and winding up with a grandiloquent speech:
Persuading advertisers to pay to reach that upscale online readership is still a tough sell.
“This is not just a problem for Pajamas Media. Going forward, it’s going to be a huge problem for all [online] media,” he said.
The man who heads a major new media concern (though he doesn’t talk specifically about the finances of the privately held firm) said it’s not money that motivates so many to participate in the online discussion.
“What’s great about blogging is that it’s humanity,” Mr. Simon said.
Wow, “blogging is humanity”. These pompous words have not moved me; on the contrary, it seems that the real purpose of sending the MSM down the river is to get their share of the ad business. A legitimate objective, it goes without saying, though very arrogant and pretentious. Entering the market making such a noise is not actually good manners.
Neither is it the best manners not to give reasons for a decision. Decisions should be motivated; in particular the decisions of public officials should never surprise the market, because they should be taken on the basis of rules and sine ira et studio; that is, without passion or unfair pondering. Of course, everything changes in business: good companies are supposed to surprise the markets (positively); or in war: war is deception and some bloggers are using something worst than deception, flagrant lies.
But GoV is not competing with PJM nor is it at war with them. Then? Well, I suppose that PJM is only taking care of business, and GoV has become an inconvenient fellow traveler in a PC world. What can we say?
Those bloggers in Pajamas are now dressing up in the elegant Loro Piana suits and do not want to risk ruining them. They will simply loose the aura of independence, because they have demonstrated that they submit to politically correct opinion. An alternative media joins the mainstream. Good luck.
But what was so outrageous in the post by El Ingles that moved PJM´s board to eject GoV? In the essay I only find articulate and sound reasoning:
- One of the basic principles of Islam is imposing Sharia on the entire world, making non-Muslims second class citizens, actually serfs.
- Muslims feel now demographically, financially and cultural able to do it and are indeed planning to do it.
- There are two answers against any aggression: submitting and fighting.
- If we submit, then
- It would be still possible to fight back using the “legitimate violence of the State”, but we are not actually doing it –mainstream parties do not really care, see for instance Sarkozy- and the situation is deteriorating. Therefore, at a certain point there will be submission or popular riots.
This is what the post says. As indicated in Atlas Shrugs, using the word genocide, is NOT advocating for it. But I would go further; the mention of genocide by El Inglés is actually misleading, because what he describes is NOT genocide, but popular riots with massive killings. This is not the Armenian genocide, planned by the Turks; this is not the genocide of Ukrainian peasants, planned by the communists, and this is not the genocide of Jews and Gypsies planned by the Nazis. NO; this is just massive killings by the European peoples in the exercise of the natural right to self defence against the will of their political elites, who have not done their duties in due time to protect them from Islamic slavery and slaughter.
Therefore, why this scandal now? And why does PJM refuse to publish the motivation for their decision?
Lo que os hace falta es leer un poco más. Tal cantidad de barbaridades, de incultura, de estupidez acumulada en un blog resulta espantoso. Es una lástima que en vez de promover algo bueno, se pierda el tiempo leyendo semejante batiburrillo de ideas sin enjundia, de patochadas convencidas y de fanáticos sin dos dedos de frente. Si tuvieras decencia, antes de escribir noticias sin ningún fuste, sesgadas y sin contrastar sería bueno que os decidierais a pensar. No cuesta mucho, y os prometo que leer y aprender es divertido.
Me he encontrado por casualidad con este blog. Siento una profunda tristeza y espero que los que os manipulan desde tribunas que pregonan la injusticia y el odio paguen por ello. Dios, nuestro Dios cristianos, os aseguro, no está con vosotros, que sólo tenéis odio e ignorancia.
Un saludo.
Disculpame pero es un rollo!
Puedes explicar en dos palabras que otra pelea de Marujas está ocurriendo?
Y disculpa peo creo que cada uno tiéne derecho a hacer de su Blog un pito, sin preguntarle a nadie su opinión y tú lo sabes muy bien…
Les han echado de PJM por un post que han puesto y como PJM no ha explicado la motivación de su decisión me permito hacer una especulación al respecto. La publico aquí porque es mi blog, como bien dices.
A mi no me parece una pelea de Marujas, Augusto, sino una cosa muy seria. Lo que está en juego es si Norteamerica nos atacará, como hizo con los serbios, el día en caso de que los europeos ejerzan el derecho a la autodefensa frente a un invasor. Es decir, nuestra muerte o esclavitud, y la de nuestros hijos.
Vamos, que no es una cuestión de pijamas o de trajes
Aunque las telas de Loro Piana son las mejores, sin competencia posible.
Yo creo que USA está impulsando la expansión de la UE para neutralizar a Europa.
Si se presentara una guerra civíl en Europa y no en USA al mismo tiempo, éste país nos atacaría para reafirmar la autocracia europea que le sirve a sus propositos.
No vamos a ganar de ninguna manera porque la Democracia y la libertad no existen. Solamente podemos inclinar la balanza lo suficiente como para que los de arriba cambien de planes. y hagan algo que se parezca mas a nuestros deseos.
Onettias, cita caso concreto, por favor.
Por cierto, no creo que leas más que yo.
Con onettias no hay tutías.
Se habrá confundido con la Webislam?
SHHHH!!! Estoy pensando…
En cuanto a leer, lo importante no es leer sino que te quede algo de lo que leíste. Conozco a un tío que tiene una pila de libros al lado del servicio, siempre me pregunto si tarda semanas en aliviarse o tarda minutos en leer un libro.