There is an opinion piece in today's Guardian, concerning the recent aquittal of Amanda Knox in the Meredith Kercher murder case.
The article was open for comments, as such articles usually are, and expecting an array of interesting - certainly not crass or too ignorant - comments, I started reading the few comments that were already there, and contributed mine. Then, I was interrupted, and I left the web page open.
When I returned, a few hours later, I remembered the article and wanted to continue reading.
Forgetting that I already had a tab with that web page open, I opened a new one.
What a surprise!
All the comments, but one (consisting of two words), had been removed.
I copied the comments from the old, un-refreshed page, and I would gladly show them to you; but I am not sure the authors of the comments would agree, and I have no way of contacting them.
So, I'll only show you mine (in direct reply to the article):
Are you kidding me?
Why would she want to escape from the "clutches" of the media who did play a role in building up her (unpleasant) public persona but have now, by the same token, provided her with a free (and abundant!) meal ticket?
She is set for life, precisely because of the persona that the media - with abundant help from herself - built.
I don't know if she was actively, or at all, implicated in Meredith's murder.
But if she lacked the fortitude to withstand alleged pressure from the police and pointed her finger at an innocent man, accusing him of murder, I doubt she would be motivated enough to refuse the multi-million offers coming to her now.
And the price for those, of course, is publicity.
I am sure many people are much worse off.
Some of them are even dead.
You may agree or disagree - even passionately so - with the contents, but really... If this is considered censorship-worthy - and the other comments removed were more or less in the same tone - then I have to ask myself: whom or what, exactly, is the Guardian guarding?
Not freedom of opinion, that's certain.
