|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Common Dreams article.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This page was nominated for deletion on February 3, 2007. The result of the discussion was no consensus.|
I've removed the statement "Common Dreams publishes editorials that support their view of the original vision, or "common dream", of the founding fathers of the United States." which was changed to "Common Dreams publishes editorials that support their view of the original vision, or "common dream", of certain of the founding fathers of the United States. Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison can be included in the list of the founding fathers represented by the group that refers to itself as "progressive."" by User:Son of Man. I couldn't find support on their website or elsewhere for the general claim, much less the specific claim about which founding fathers. If someone has a source for this claim, please provide it. Thanks ! FreplySpang 15:14, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Removal of information
This information continues to be removed:
- Promotional in nature. WP:NOT#SOAP. · 18:20, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
A few quotes from the 335 articles on Lexis Nexis mentioning Commondreams
From the first 37 of the 335 references to commondreams.org on Lexis Nexis:
Bloggers spear caucus show idea
Des Moines Register (Iowa)
January 4, 2007
...The latest, [Katherine van Wormer article] published at CommonDreams.org, likens the Iraq Study Group report and Bush's response to a classic intervention scenario. "The long-anticipated report of the Iraq Study Group has been likened in some media reports to the classic treatment intervention provided to drug users and alcoholics who have 'hit bottom.' ... Characteristic of a person with an addictive mentality, the president responded in a state of denial as do the 'enablers' around him. His supporters are getting fewer and fewer, however."
Would the World's Largest Science Teacher's Organization Ignore Climate Change Education?
The Democratic Daily
November 29, 2006
Today's Guest Post is from John F. Borowski. John is a science teacher of 26 years whose pieces have appeared in the N.Y. Times, UTNE Reader, Counterpunch, Commondreams and many other sites...
I wrote in Commondreams.org about this dilemma and three special sentences comes to mind from a July 7th, 2005 piece in which I write an open letter to NSTA Executive Director about the distribution of corporate sponsored materials via the NSTA: In a recent NSTA annual report document, Exxon Mobil (NYSE:XOM) Foundation President Edward Ahnert explains its "partnership" with the NSTA clearly. "NSTA is such a natural partner for us. No other organization has the ability to reach thousands of teachers who share ExxonMobil's commitment to improving science education." The question that begs to be answered Mr. Wheeler is this: can you trust Exxon Mobil?
James Eagle trawls through the web to bring you a few of the top sites for progressive international news
November 18, 2006 Saturday
Common Dreams (www.commondreams.org) is handy too, while Information Clearing House (www.informationclearinghouse.info) is a reader-funded site offering "news you won't find on CNN or Fox."
'Sage of Athens' ; London paper credits Harmening as first to make Iraq-Vietnam analogy
The State Journal-Register (Springfield, IL)
November 7, 2006 Tuesday
Type the words "Iraq would become Vietnam 2002," without quotation marks, into the Google search engine, and Wallerstein's piece shows up on the first results page. It is reprinted on the progressive Web site CommonDreams.org, but a subsequent Lexis-Nexis search verified that the piece did, in fact, appear on that date in the L.A. Times.
Subtle but pervasive: discrimination against mothers and pregnant women in the workplace.
Fordham Urban Law Journal
November 1, 2006
See Charlotte Fishman, "Teetering on the Family-friendly Edge": Discrimination Against Mothers in Academia, COMMON DREAMS, Sept. 25, 2005, http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0925-21.htm; Scott Jaschik, Faux Family-friendly?, INSIDE HIGHER ED, Sept. 15, 2005, http://insidehighered.com/news/2005/09/15/ucsb
Inside cable news: a conversation with FAIR's Jeff Cohen; Fair and Accuracy In Reportiong; Interview
St. Louis Journalism Review
October 1, 2006
During this time, independent media were booming. DailyKos.com and"This Modern World" started in 2002 and took off. Web sites like commondream.org were booming. Radio and television shows, like "Democracy Now," were booming.
The Israel lobby and U.S. foreign policy.
Middle East Policy
September 22, 2006
"Report of the Open-Ended Working Group on the Question of Equitable Representation on and Increase in the Membership of the Security Council and Other Matters Related to the Security Council," Annex III, U.N. General Assembly Official Records, 58th Session, SupplementNo. 47, 2004, pp. 13-14; Donald Neff, "An Updated List of Vetoes Cast by the United States to Shield Israel from Criticism by the U.N. Security Council," Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, May/June 2005; Stephen Zunes, "U.S. Declares Open Season on UN Workers," CommonDreams.org
|On google news:
Hundreds of Thousands Gather in Washington to Demand an End to War in Iraq
Local newspaper in Cuba
Common Dreams News Center reports that Military families are calling on Congress to vote against the upcoming appropriation request that would allow the war in Iraq to continue. Military Families Speak Out (MFSO), an organization of over 3,200 military families who are opposed to the war in Iraq, is the largest organization of military families opposing a war in the history of the United States.
US press ignores Gitmo protesters
Daily Times, Pakistan
On Thursday, according to the online site Common Dreams, the group will walk to the gates of the Guantanamo prison from the Cuban side.
I removed one external link:
Discover the network
Discover the network is not a reliable source. It lacks verifiability from other locations, it has a strong bias, it is rarely corroborated and never cited by other sources. Hipocrite - «Talk» 20:24, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- I strongly disagree. Also I believe it is the web version of a published book. --BenBurch 20:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
- You are correct, sir. I confused it with a book of almost the same title, and as Horowitz has SO many books in print, thought it must have been another of his. --BenBurch 20:58, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Editoralizing moved from article page
- Claims that Common Dreams uses questionable sources, and makes the claim that their reported story relating to Hurricane Katrina Issues - Prisoners Abandoned to Floodwaters is totally inaccurate, quote "Not Even Close".
Freedom of Speech
- Common Dreams will delete any "discussion" item that does not march in lock-step with their agenda. It is not a true discussion forum, but rather a gathering of like-minded leftists who do not tolerate questions or contrary views.
126.96.36.199 20:07, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
- (Admittedly, its editorializing ~ but true never-the-less) User:188.8.131.52
- I believe you. I have no problem with this being in the article, as long as it is sourced. 184.108.40.206 13:49, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
Someone (I assume who was banned from Commons Dreams) keeps adding criticism in regards to the site's banning policy. The first edit was unsourced OR. The second edit was sourced, but using blogs. If there are reliable sources (mainstream) that mention this controversy, find them and add those to the article. APK (If You Wanna) 05:11, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- In the criticism section, I have added information, with citations, regarding Commondreams deletions and bannings of commenters to it's articles - particularly the way it bans those who criticize mainstream liberal positions from the left. In comparison, does say, freerepublic.com ban posters who are "too right-wing" - or who criticize conservatism from the right? This documented behavior is noteworthy and should be in the article.
In response to the need for "mainstream sources", where in the "mainstream" can someone find any information regarding Commondreams at all? "Agnostic preachers" kid himself acknowledges their practice of banning critical comments from the left - comments that aren't inflamatory in any way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Please don't put words in my mouth. I haven't acknowledged their banning policy. In fact, I've only visited the site once and found it to be rather lame. The only thing I care about in regards to Common Dreams is that if you're going to add criticism to their WP entry, then it must be sourced. If you can't find a mainstream source mentioning their banning policy, then it isn't notable enough for inclusion on their entry. APK (If You Wanna) 05:25, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- Aren't multiple, named "eyewitness" accounts of the banning practice a suitable source? And if web-logs or political commentary web sites aren't "reputable" than can any internet sources be trusted - including Wikipedia itself? Earlier cited sources in the praise and criticism section are the Amateur-run Portland Indymedia Center and the Pundit Bill Moyers - plus promotional writing from the Commondreams site itself. How are these considered reputable "mainstream" sources? Remeber, the section of this article is titled "Praise and Criticism". So don't I merely have to establish that sources other than the author exist for this criticism?
I will add my proposed edit below. Please advise how it can be improved.. Thank-you.
Commondreams.org has also been criticized for it's practice of banning, without any form of notice, users of it's reader-comments utility. Uniquely among political web sites, it practice is to ban those who those who deviate beyond a certain moderate position, in this case, people regarded as "too left". This includes those who offer criticisms of liberalism, or the US Democratic party from a leftist perspective. Most notably, a dramatic "purge" of left-critics of Democratic party candidates occurred just before and after the November 2008 election.    All comment deletions and bannings occur with considerable opacity, and those who even tangentially mention comment deletions or disappearance of commenters themselves get "disappeared". No notice or explanation from the moderator is ever given - even after repeated e-mail and phone requests for clarification from the person banned.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 05:48, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- A Wikiuser nicked "Mewulwe" ("Me-cunt??") keeps scrubbing mention of Commondreams.org's practice of deletions and banning. This should now be considered vandalism.
I question the statement "This policy was established to assure its independence as a media outlet" With articles like http://www.commondreams.org/view/2014/03/30-5 it is fairly obvious that commondreams.org is not independent.
- "CommonDreams erases me from their site". John Caruso. 6 September 2007
- "Common Dreams? Or is it censorship in common with the corporate media?". Tony Logan. 6 September 2007
- "CommonDreams.org Censors Comments Section". Digg.com. 12 October 2007
- "Progressives Disappearing Progressives". Jozef Hand-Boniakowski. 31 May 2009