The Fix: Accurate Information or Propaganda?

Censorship

Censorship to Protect the Program of His Kingdom

The Fix has recently taken to heavy censorship of those who are critical of AA. Pro-AA commentators have been free to post whatever they want for quite some time. AA critics have started getting their posts delayed for many hours and usually removed. While those of pro-AA posters remain, no matter how much they are contradictory to the posted rules.

The following comments (along with almost all of the posts by AA-critical writers) were removed from an article by a Joe Nowinski titled “Thoughts on the Overdose Death of a Young Woman” . The article is about a therapist (Nowinski) who, in spite of his patient insisting that AA wasn’t good for her, was not offered an alternative treatment. The patient ended up dying. This, alone, is grounds for malpractice. But there is more.

The “treatment” he was giving was 12-Step indoctrination. The fact that AA has never been shown to work better than nothing is not the only thing wrong with AA.  Four U.S. Circuit Courts have ruled that AA is religious and the 9th Circuit Court went so far as ruling not only that AA is religious, but that agents of the state who coerce to AA can be sued because the violation of the Constitution is so obvious. Recently, a $2,000,000.00 case was won against what many call a cult on a par with Scientology and the Moonies and their cures for social problems.

Here are a couple comments of mine that were deleted on this article:

It would be nice if people who make a living off of 12-Step indoctrination would not use the death of their patients as reason to promote more 12-Step “treatment.” 12-Step is especially dangerous since it gets people to adopt the alcoholic/addict identity and then throws in “Powerless” as if that is not a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Harvard psychiatrist George Vaillant called the AA death rate “appalling.” He was not biased against AA. He is an Al-Anon. He was biased (as all too many professional “helpers”) in that after his study and finding the appalling death rate he went on to promote AA in the NEJM. He also blamed the failure/deaths of those in his study who went to AA in terms of them not “coming to believe.” He compared AA to the Fountain at Lourdes.

Harvard psychiatrist George Vaillant is one of the most well-known “two-hatters.” The term “two-hatter” is from the AA literature and means someone with a professional title (e.g. psychologist, doctor, judge, attorney, EAP employee, etc.) who uses their position as a professional to proselytize for AA. Vaillant, is the author of “A Natural History of Alcoholism” and a trustee of AA Inc. He is also a member of Al-Anon, a 12-Step “fellowship.” His comments have been used to push AA for decades in places like the New England Journal of Medicine.

Here another comment that was promptly removed from the same Fix article:

It is not at all unusual for two-hatter mental health worker continue trying to push someone into the Step groups no matter how poorly they are doing and no matter how much they don’t want to be there.

The two-hatter is not bothered by conscience like the rest of us would be. The two-hatter has conscious contact with God and knows God’s Will for him. God’s Will for all Groupers is to get some converts.

Here is a post by an anonymous poster similar to many others that were left:

In any case, The Fix has a policy of deleting posts critical of their authors and AA posters. They do not offer a balanced perspective, even though they go to great effort to try to present one, never naming an author promoting AA as a group member and never even reprimanding the 12-Step posters who viciously attack those who have been taken advantage of (e.g. murder, rape, theft, 13th stepping, etc.) by fellow group members.

So that everyone can know what the fix is doing, it is hoped that others who have been censored by The Fix will report their experiences here.  This can either be comments below or your own article.

This entry was posted in Media and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
Guest
Silver Damsen
2 years 3 months ago

Dear Editor-in-Chief, The Fix:

I have read your post that you delete comments that talk about other commentators and their behavior on and off the board. However, you still no consistent in these deletions.

 

For example, I’m going to cut and paste a section from “Addiction Not a Crime” that demonstrates some deletions but leaves up many comments that would seem to violate your new stated policy. The most glaring example of which is that you leave up two personal attacks on me.

 

I will continue to see this as disgustingly Pro AA and deserving of boycott that you leave up Pro AA personal attacks on Anti-AA, such as myself, but if I were to attempt to point out the personal attack/ad hominem arguing style of Clarabelle12 and Stingyfinger is the worst and lowest form of argument you would remove my comments. I would also argue that ad hominem arguments not only debase discussion boards but fall under the rubric of talking about another commentator. Also note, that Clarabelle12, the most notorious of the Pro AA commentators for using vicious ad hominen arguments, gains her material for these attacks through exhaustive Internet searches as well as contacts former AA associates in the hopes of finding even more specific details, and then elaborates with her own imagination, to create an argument designed specifically to hurt the person she is attacking. Thus, her goal is not to win the argument and show that the logic that supports AA is more sound than that of the Anti-AA side, rather it is to emotionally scar and threaten someone. That your current policy encourages this more so than ever before is pretty horrible.

 

No one in the Anti-AA community does the kind of ad hominen that Clarabelle12 has built her reputation on, and we are in the minority in terms of total numbers. Nonetheless, you institute a policy that prevents Anti-AA from dealing with the abusive tactics of Pro AA commentators, which in my case was analyzing Clarabelle12’s argument technique and showing that not only was it abusive but that the style of the abuse was in keeping with AA ideology; hence, if my argument had stayed up I would have proven that AA was abusive in that context.

 

However, you deleted all of this in the Helpola article but instead left up two glaring personal attacks on me in this article, “Addiction is Not a Crime.” If you are not glaringly Pro AA, it would seem that you would want to work to resolve these differences. If you are neutral, it would seem that you want to not appear to be so biased.

 

Here is a cut and paste of the discussion in “Addiction is Not a Crime” that is specific to my argument. When the text reads “This comment was deleted” that is exactly what the post says now:

 

“This comment was deleted.

Silver Damsen Guest • 10 days ago

What is really interesting about the Fix right now is that they are removing posts from Anti-AA writers for reasons I still can’t understand. Posts removed are not necessary nasty or threatening, but they do come down hard on Pro AA people. This would seem like a kind of post that I would remove if I were editing posts, but then again maybe not. There is no real content here. It is just insults. It doesn’t address any of the valid reasons why some would say that AA is a cult or that some would say that AA kills people. It just gets hysterical, uses profanity, and insults. The insult is too broad to truly mean anything anyway. I was also accused of being stupid. Again, the irony is that AA has the slogan “Keep it Simple, Stupid,” and discourages all critical thinking in favor of pretty much blind obedience to sponsors and the texts of AA, and yet Pro AA people insult those that are critical of AA by calling them stupid.

This comment was deleted.

 

stingyfinger Guest • 3 days ago

In order to understand the deletions policy better, review which of the posts in this thread concern the article, or the issues raised within it. Those will stick.

Since your victimhood is not a focus of Fix articles you can reasonably expect to see many of your novelettes intricately describing your heartbreaks and the measures the individuals involved had to take to protect themselves from you regularly disappear.

Should you ever become less self-obsessed, and develop an ability to edit out your drama drivel, it’s possible that the tiny leftovers might remain.

Clarabelle12 Guest • 5 days ago

Actually, that isn’t what happened at all, Silver. You will notice that I told Ken that the thread wasn’t long for this world.

Any personal stuff has been disclosed at your choosing. It appears the fair people of AA handled it with tact and tried to keep any of it from escalating, to no avail. I don’t think they were vicious idiots. I think we all just have your number and wish more for you.

I will continue to wish you well on your journey.

Good night.”

 

Silver Damsen

Guest
Silver Damsen
2 years 3 months ago

The above is a copy of my third letter to the Fix. I thought it might be useful to see what the Fix is keeping up.

Guest
Karen Parker
2 years 3 months ago

thank you. xx

Guest
Amythist
2 years 3 months ago

Thank you, Ken, for bringing attention to the censorship on thefix. Their rules have recently changed dramatically. I have stopped posting there quite a while ago due to it. Now they’re very heavily censoring comments on the Pro Voices articles. You can’t post anything the least bit critical no matter how absurd the article is. I also find it odd that they think these professionals can’t handle even a tiny criticism while those authors who aren’t professionals get thrown to the wolves.

They call it moderation but when it isn’t applied evenly across the board, it isn’t moderation–it’s censorship.

Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Actually, they have a point if they think the two-hatter professionals can’t stand up to criticism, because they generally can’t. That is one of the reasons for “Anonymity at the media level.”

Guest
Amythist
2 years 3 months ago

I always thought that was to prevent from showing how ineffective AA is when someone goes in the media then subsequently relapses.

How much do you want to bet that the next time Stanton Peele has an article on thefix, they don’t moderate it?

Guest
2 years 3 months ago

Hello Everyone, I seem to have my blog working properly with Disqus and a new, short post on the censorship at thefix.