http://www.cnn.com/2004/S...index.html

How sad. And fascist.

-----

uncboy said:

The site is missing. What was "fascist" about it??

JediMaster said:

The article says,

George Michael has shut down his Web site chatroom because -- in his words -- fans have been "slagging him off."

So he just shut it down because he didn't like what the fans had to say about him and his current output. If that's not fascist, it is at least grossly egotistical and a blatant affront to free speech.

--

Actually, he can afford to do it, and that's probably why he did.

uncboy said:

Damn. Chaka must not give a damn what her fans say at her official chat board. I can't imagine George Michael's fans being any more insulting than her fans, but her board is still up and running.

RipHer2Shreds said:

Chaka mad?

The last comment of this article sums it up the best


Seems that's why NPGMC has those so-called "thought police"...

Being that its HIS website, he does have the right to shut it down. Is that the right move to make? Probably not, but he still has the right. Its no different than the rules imposed on NPGMC. To me, that is why sites like Prince.org exist.

Way to go George! Fuck the chatroom. All his true fans need is some new music once in a while and perhaps a live concert or two wouldn't hurt, but as far as the chatroom goes, I think he did the right thing!

I think its awesome he actually posted on there directly, not through some alter ego or psycho employee.

I don't know how internet saavy George is, but I think sometimes people take the harshness on message boards way too seriously. All message boards are that way, you get used to it after a while.

well, i guess he didn't think the people coming to HIS website...supposedly people who LIKE him...would be as nasty as they are. i say the same thing here about prince. why do those who seem do dislike him continue to come? its better he close it down than constantly edit what people say. i agree with his decision much more than prince's censorship stance. it may seem egotistical or whatever but at least george is being honest and forward.

SassyBritches said:

The thing is, you are free to say whatever you want to say over at NPGMC. They just don't allow profanity. It's almost like running through the public library shouting obscenities. You're free to do it there, but you're more than likely going to get put out as a result. There's a difference between censorship and speaking at the right time, right place and in the right manner. However, I agree that anyone who doesn't enjoy truly enjoy an artist, shouldn't devote their time to a website for that artist.

psykosoul said:

I feel what hes saying. It seems that he didnt want to contribute to what he saw as a very negative vibe. Thats like inviting someone to your home for dinner, paying for the meal, and having them talk shit to or about you the entire time. I dont think its censorship. George Michael has no control over your thoughts or your words. Hes simply refusing to provide a forum for the public to fling shit at him.(warranted or not) Im sure he already knows that his new album is boring. He doesnt need to be constantly reminded
Check out some of ?loves comments on okplayer. ITs the same situation. He hasnt shut down the site, but at times its pretty obvious that some of the peanut gallery comments get on his nerves.
[This message was edited Thu Jul 8 14:22:20 2004 by found1]

i see both sides, really.

one the one hand, why pay to have a site designed and maintained for your fans if all they're gonna do is come on and talk shit about you? criticism is all fine and well, but if you're talking on the artist's dime (so to speak), it's not asking that much to phrase your thoughts respectfully. as far as "official sites" across the board, my guess is that this is a sliding scale matter, depending on how much smacktalk the particular artist can/will tolerate. for example, i've seen some folks talk a lot of shit on the official talking heads fan site, and tina weymouth herself will lob back a witty response, which not only addresses the core criticism but puts out the fire with her loving/bitchy/witty sense of humor. she can handle the hecklers, so not a lot gets censored over there. other artists, such as george michael or prince, are a titch more sensitive...

now, on the other hand, don't call something an "open forum" if it's not, and if you're going to have rigid restraints on what can and can't be said, then keep it consistent. i see bullying and smack-talk all the time at NPGMC, and i'm guessing the only reason it's allowed to go on is because it's not directed at prince, the NPG or larry graham. i see profanity out the wazoo over there, only it's misspelled and thus i guess it's considered "cute". last time i was over at this so-called "family site" i saw a thread title about giving head.

this is why i think non-official fan sites are so important. artists are idiosynchratic, ego-driven and inconsistent. ya gotta love 'em, but they're clearly not who to look to when you wanna enjoy a stable web community where you can get information and communicate with other fans in a fairly stable environment. when it works, it works - there are more than a few awesome official sites with great bulletin boards and chats - but when you have sites owned by artists who are constantly flipping the script and who are too busy to keep up with the follow-through, you get some really frustrating products as a result.

which isn't to deny 'em points for trying, mind you.

psykosoul said:

are you kidding me? cuz that's funny! i was banned from the forums for VERY POLITELY saying i didn't like how much prince charged fans in australia during the whole meet and greet thing. no profanity, no nastiness. just opinion. banned.

psykosoul said:

wait, wait!!

hold on!!

Im ready now.. almost

U must be a professional comedian, cause that's the funniest shit I've read in a looong time..

Priceless!!

Please say some more Prince jokes like, "Prince is not a control freak and has never fooled around"
[This message was edited Thu Jul 8 15:26:13 2004 by CokeJohnson]

I don't wanna post jack because this is about George Michael. But most of you folks who were banned got a funny way of "politely" saying shit. I've complained about several things and haven't really had a problem. But for the most part I'm gonna agree with found1 and say that I wouldn't allow anyone to come into my house and disrespect me...even if you paid me $25 to come over it still wouldn't give you the right to disrespect the rules of my house.

CokeJohnson said:

It's true. I mean you can't post threads about people fucking on stage but if you read the terms and agreement before you fork over $25 for membership you know you can't do that. I guess I should clarify that when I say "whatever you want to say" I mean "anything in good taste".
[This message was edited Thu Jul 8 15:38:13 2004 by psykosoul]

psykosoul said:

but certain people disrespect the rules of that house all the time, and they're allowed to keep getting away with it. i guess it's like george orwell said - "all animals are created equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

Anxiety said:

But that goes on here too. I been accused by a certain moderator here of baiting flame wars with certain individuals and have had my posts edited, deleted and whatnot. I'm not saying I wasn't guilty of it at one time. But even after I agreed and adhered to the new rules of conduct here I've still been edited and snipped. There are going to be cliques on every online message board who not going to be unbiased when it comes to moderating. However, when you're not in charge you've always got to play by someone elses rules.

psykosoul said:

Not necessarily. There are more loopholes than there are nooses.

psykosoul said:

it's one thing to play by someone else's rules, and another thing to respect those rules when other people are blatantly pissing all over them. believe it or not, i think highly of the club, but i have a real issue with the "clique" over there for whom the rules do not apply. there's a level of snobbery, bullying and territorialism over there that makes the site less and less fun to visit the more it goes unchecked. and we're talking about grown ass people here.

to be quite honest, if that kind of environment is the truth of an "official online fan community", then i think george michael's decision was spot-on, and i wouldn't mind seeing NPGMC take on the same course of action. in the meantime, you can post all ya want about oral sex and say "batch" and "azz" at people till the cows come home, but don't you dare mention the airport camera-snatching incident or grouse about cruddy member seats at a concert, because that betrays UNITY.

psykosoul said:

*****

It's not like George is taking his ball & going home - George put up the $ for the playground. If he don't like what the kids are doing on the playground (tearing down the b-ball hoops, breaking windows, shitting in corners) he has every right to shut it down...




.
[This message was edited Thu Jul 8 18:55:30 2004 by CalhounSq]

I think George has every right to do what he did, good for him.

psykosoul said:

my screenname over there is poompoom. go find a post of mine that is rude or is counter to their rules. go on, try it.

SassyBritches said:

I LOVE your signature, brilliant!

EverlastingNow said:

thanks!

For the most part,i don't really like the chatrooms/message boards at artists' "official sites" anyway.I would never waste my time at the NPGMC forum because I want the freedom to say what I think.That's why Prince.Org is so much fun....it's not Prince's official site,we're able to argue,debate,and discuss things and not have to worry about offending Prince.We won't get banned for saying that a certain song or album sucks...lol...as for George Michael,it's his site so he does have the right to close it down if he thinks fans are being too negative.
[This message was edited Fri Jul 9 3:06:16 2004 by DavidEye]