| Revision as of 00:28, 10 July 2004 editNeutrality (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators165,433 edits rv← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:35, 10 July 2004 edit undoGet-back-world-respect (talk | contribs)4,584 edits polls, insider terms, bans, racism; based on Dominick's version, Neutrality, what was your issue here?Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| '''Free Republic''' is a noted ] ] activist |
'''Free Republic''' is a noted ] ] activist privately-owned organization best known for its internet forum. | ||
| ==Origins of Free Republic== | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | It was founded as a self-described "electronic townhall," in ] by ] of ] as a ] discussion site during the ] years. Members would copy articles from other news sources and then the community would discuss them. The group first came to prominence during the ] controversy when protests and write-in campaigns were organized. The group also played an important role in the controversy over the ] where it again organized protests, including the creation of the famous "Sore/Loserman" signs. The group has also played a role in organizing demonstrations advocating military action in Iraq, across the United States during the ]. | ||
| ⚫ | There is no membership structure, or regional chiefs. Users of the board (which call themselves "Freepers") simply organize local gatherings themselves on the various message boards. There is a member directory, but nearly everyone has a pseudonym and few people divulge their true identity in their online profiles. | ||
| ==Board Users== | |||
| ⚫ | There is no membership structure, or regional chiefs. Users of the board (which call themselves "Freepers") simply organize local gatherings themselves on the various message boards. There is a member directory, but, like in most internet forums, nearly everyone has a pseudonym and few people divulge their true identity in their online profiles. All members are afforded a mail service that allows them to store private messages to each other. Many also inform other members about certain interest areas, such as "Space" or "Bible Study". | ||
| ==Discussion== | |||
| Since the Right-of-Center in American Politics is not uniform in all its beliefs, the posters on Free Republic are not uniform in their beliefs either. However, the community is largely, but not exclusively, united on certain issues, including being against gun control and abortion, having a strong dislike for the Clintons, being pro-Israel and against the formation of a Palestinian State, and against ] and ], see . On some issues the readership is quite divided. Three main groups can be observed: The Republican ]s, who are very pro-] and the ], the ], and the staunch ]s. | Since the Right-of-Center in American Politics is not uniform in all its beliefs, the posters on Free Republic are not uniform in their beliefs either. However, the community is largely, but not exclusively, united on certain issues, including being against gun control and abortion, having a strong dislike for the Clintons, being pro-Israel and against the formation of a Palestinian State, and against ] and ], see . On some issues the readership is quite divided. Three main groups can be observed: The Republican ]s, who are very pro-] and the ], the ], and the staunch ]s. | ||
| Divisive issues include ] and the legalization of ]; although the organization has an official policy of not permitting ], many |
Divisive issues include ] and the legalization of ]; although the organization has an official policy of not permitting ], many posts show it. Examples include calling Palestinian children "bombs still growing" (a reference to ]), racial references in the , and frequent references to the ] as "weasels" . The moderators often remove or ban posters or ridicule viewpoints criticizing Israel, the ] or ], etc. from its discussion boards. | ||
| The website does not seek to be a board that represents all political viewpoints: it is a meeting point for those to the right of the political center in America, and articles posted which contain unwelcome (usually left-wing) views are customarily tagged with the words 'BARF ALERT' after the headline, a feature of FreeRepublic (known as 'FR') meant to warn the reader in advance of an opinion running counter to the prevailing perspective of the site's intended audience. Freepers are often called to manipulate online polls, and there is a daily prayer for Bush. | The website does not seek to be a board that represents all political viewpoints: it is a meeting point for those to the right of the political center in America, and articles posted which contain unwelcome (usually left-wing) views are customarily tagged with the words 'BARF ALERT' after the headline, a feature of FreeRepublic (known as 'FR') meant to warn the reader in advance of an opinion running counter to the prevailing perspective of the site's intended audience. Freepers are often called to manipulate online polls, and there is a daily prayer for Bush. | ||
| ==FReeping a Poll== | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| The manipulation of polls, which is not unique to the FR community, has not been without controversy. Online polls are not always representative of the population at large. Self-selected polls rarely are representative, as only activists will go and vote. | |||
| ⚫ | In some cases, Freepers merely try to convince as many other Freepers as possible to vote. Most Freepers would have course never voted if not reading about the poll in Free Republic. Many of the polls that Freepers urge to "freep" are local television or newspaper websites. Usually today, all online polls try to prevent multiple votes from the same user, by using cookies or not allowing multiple votes from the same IP address. Some online polls today even block votes that are coming from the same referral address. There are ways around these things, but they require at least better than average computer expertise and are somewhat time consuming. Most polls that are "freeped" simply have a large number of Freepers voting once, this certainly skews results for local papers or other media much more so than for national sites. Many in the Freeper community advocate freeping the polls, because they state that online polls are statistically invalid, and therefore, stuffing them makes no one rely on them for public opinion. Many online polls have since become much more adept at preventing massive ballot stuffing, although it is of course still possible. | ||
| It has been observed that the group has borrowed many of its behaviors from traditionally leftist organizations. The mass demonstrations are one example. The organization of boycotts, such as that against ] over the Iraq crisis, is another. The group is funded through quarterly donations drives which mimic public television and ]. The website does not charge a regular usage fee. | It has been observed that the group has borrowed many of its behaviors from traditionally leftist organizations. The mass demonstrations are one example. The organization of boycotts, such as that against ] over the Iraq crisis, is another. The group is funded through quarterly donations drives which mimic public television and ]. The website does not charge a regular usage fee. | ||
| ==Lawsuit and Settlement== | |||
| Because it has been a practice of its users to copy and paste copyrighted news stories in their entirety to its discussion boards, FreeRepublic was sued by the '']'' and the '']''. ('']'' and the '']'' were part of the original consortium threatening legal action, but they dropped out before the lawsuit was filed.) Many members view the lawsuit as an unsuccessful conspiracy by the leftist media to stifle the organization (Mr. Robinson referred to the suit as "a life and death struggle with elements of the socialist propaganda machine"). |
Because it has been a practice of its users to copy and paste copyrighted news stories in their entirety to its discussion boards, FreeRepublic was sued by the '']'' and the '']''. ('']'' and the '']'' were part of the original consortium threatening legal action, but they dropped out before the lawsuit was filed.) Many members view the lawsuit as an unsuccessful conspiracy by the leftist media to stifle the organization (Mr. Robinson referred to the suit as "a life and death struggle with elements of the socialist propaganda machine"). | ||
| In a negotiated settlement, FR agreed to remove the posted articles, and paid these two newspapers $5,000 each. Neither party was awarded any damages, legal fees or costs. Today, other publishers, such as Conde Nast, have joined the WaPost and LATimes in objecting to the posting of entire copyrighted articles. Users now post excerpts from such publishers (as allowed by ]), and the site filters submissions against a watchlist of 'banned' sources as a precaution against future lawsuits. | |||
| ==External Link== | ==External Link== | ||
Revision as of 00:35, 10 July 2004
Free Republic is a noted conservative American activist privately-owned organization best known for its internet forum.
Origins of Free Republic
It was founded as a self-described "electronic townhall," in 1996 by Jim Robinson of California as a conservative discussion site during the Clinton years. Members would copy articles from other news sources and then the community would discuss them. The group first came to prominence during the Clinton impeachment controversy when protests and write-in campaigns were organized. The group also played an important role in the controversy over the 2000 election where it again organized protests, including the creation of the famous "Sore/Loserman" signs. The group has also played a role in organizing demonstrations advocating military action in Iraq, across the United States during the Iraq disarmament crisis.
Board Users
There is no membership structure, or regional chiefs. Users of the board (which call themselves "Freepers") simply organize local gatherings themselves on the various message boards. There is a member directory, but, like in most internet forums, nearly everyone has a pseudonym and few people divulge their true identity in their online profiles. All members are afforded a mail service that allows them to store private messages to each other. Many also inform other members about certain interest areas, such as "Space" or "Bible Study".
Discussion
Since the Right-of-Center in American Politics is not uniform in all its beliefs, the posters on Free Republic are not uniform in their beliefs either. However, the community is largely, but not exclusively, united on certain issues, including being against gun control and abortion, having a strong dislike for the Clintons, being pro-Israel and against the formation of a Palestinian State, and against affirmative action and gay rights, see . On some issues the readership is quite divided. Three main groups can be observed: The Republican stalwarts, who are very pro-Bush and the Republican Party, the Christian conservatives, and the staunch libertarians.
Divisive issues include evolution and the legalization of soft drugs; although the organization has an official policy of not permitting racism, many posts show it. Examples include calling Palestinian children "bombs still growing" (a reference to suicide bombing), racial references in the song parody Crying (frying Abu-Jamal), and frequent references to the French as "weasels" . The moderators often remove or ban posters or ridicule viewpoints criticizing Israel, the Iraq or Afghanistan war, etc. from its discussion boards.
The website does not seek to be a board that represents all political viewpoints: it is a meeting point for those to the right of the political center in America, and articles posted which contain unwelcome (usually left-wing) views are customarily tagged with the words 'BARF ALERT' after the headline, a feature of FreeRepublic (known as 'FR') meant to warn the reader in advance of an opinion running counter to the prevailing perspective of the site's intended audience. Freepers are often called to manipulate online polls, and there is a daily prayer for Bush.
FReeping a Poll
The manipulation of polls, which is not unique to the FR community, has not been without controversy. Online polls are not always representative of the population at large. Self-selected polls rarely are representative, as only activists will go and vote.
In some cases, Freepers merely try to convince as many other Freepers as possible to vote. Most Freepers would have course never voted if not reading about the poll in Free Republic. Many of the polls that Freepers urge to "freep" are local television or newspaper websites. Usually today, all online polls try to prevent multiple votes from the same user, by using cookies or not allowing multiple votes from the same IP address. Some online polls today even block votes that are coming from the same referral address. There are ways around these things, but they require at least better than average computer expertise and are somewhat time consuming. Most polls that are "freeped" simply have a large number of Freepers voting once, this certainly skews results for local papers or other media much more so than for national sites. Many in the Freeper community advocate freeping the polls, because they state that online polls are statistically invalid, and therefore, stuffing them makes no one rely on them for public opinion. Many online polls have since become much more adept at preventing massive ballot stuffing, although it is of course still possible.
It has been observed that the group has borrowed many of its behaviors from traditionally leftist organizations. The mass demonstrations are one example. The organization of boycotts, such as that against France over the Iraq crisis, is another. The group is funded through quarterly donations drives which mimic public television and PBS. The website does not charge a regular usage fee.
Lawsuit and Settlement
Because it has been a practice of its users to copy and paste copyrighted news stories in their entirety to its discussion boards, FreeRepublic was sued by the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times. (Reuters and the Wall Street Journal were part of the original consortium threatening legal action, but they dropped out before the lawsuit was filed.) Many members view the lawsuit as an unsuccessful conspiracy by the leftist media to stifle the organization (Mr. Robinson referred to the suit as "a life and death struggle with elements of the socialist propaganda machine").
In a negotiated settlement, FR agreed to remove the posted articles, and paid these two newspapers $5,000 each. Neither party was awarded any damages, legal fees or costs. Today, other publishers, such as Conde Nast, have joined the WaPost and LATimes in objecting to the posting of entire copyrighted articles. Users now post excerpts from such publishers (as allowed by fair use), and the site filters submissions against a watchlist of 'banned' sources as a precaution against future lawsuits.