Censorship
I read SA daily - I have it up most of the day, in the background, in fact.
It's deeply disappointing to me that something like PhilStockWorld's daily blog (and whatever else is going unposted by SA's editors) would be censored here, not for profanity nor vulgarity, but for content that apparently doesn't sit right with some readers /editors. PSW's blog is one of the central reasons I come to SA each day (and 50k others, it would appear) as an amateur study of options and the interplay of geopolitical goings-on with the macro- economy.
My Question:
What is the policy on political speech within investment / market observations for SA contributors? Are we pretending that a hypothetical federal government's behavior - ludicrous or otherwise - doesn't have a relevant bearing on the market?
Thanks for the message, it's a fair question. We're focused on investing. Politics obviously have relevance to investing, and politics in the US are very sensitive these days.
Our policy is to make sure articles are focused on investing, and that political discussions are made relevant to the primary investing discussion, and that they are respectful and measured. That's not really from a censorship perspective, but the perspective that it's not in our interest to have an article focused on politics that devolves into a 500 comment screaming match.
In other words, the political opinion expressed to us is of no concern (within reason, I guess). Whether it is measured and whether it is relevant is our primary concern.
For what it's worth, we have gotten a lot more complaints that we have too much politics than not enough over the last 6-12 months.
Please let us know if you have any questions,
Daniel