to think that Baby Centre is being too precious over April Jones

[BurntToastSmell]

The Baby Center forums have banned all discussion of the April Jones kidnapping 'out of respect'. AIBU to think that they are BU?

[HerOffTheInternet]

having seen some of the shite that people are spouting all over the net, i tend to agree with the decision

[Sparklingbrook]

I think it's not a bad idea TBH.

[Whitecherry]

It's news

Do they ban talk about Syria? The children stabbed by their dad? Etc etc

[squeakytoy]

Having seen the comments on the DM articles about this story I can understand why. Lots of highly libelous comments and nasty posts about the childs' parents. and close family.

[BurntToastSmell]

Exactly Whitecherry - freedom of speech, debate, discussion - all healthy. Even unsavoury comments should be aloud. They can be debated.

[AMumInScotland]

I don't think the kind of "discussion" that tends to follow this kind of event gives any benefit either to that family or to anyone else. Freedom of speech usually translates as freedom to insult people who are going through hell.

[Sparklingbrook]

I agree with AMum.

[ShobGiteTheKnid]

A family are freaking out because someone abducted their baby. Idiots all over the internet think it is appropriate to have a go at this family, at a time when they don't even know if their little girl is alive or dead.
If the website you mention has to do that to keep the integrity of the site, then I applaud them. I only wish some nasty twats on here would think how truly awful it is to insult a distraught family like this.

[halcyondays]

If its because people have been making horrible comments then yabu. I wouldn't call it being "precious" more having a bit of respect for the family.

[BurntToastSmell]

Surely that's just the nature of being in the public eye? (whether by choice or circumstance).

Also, I doubt April's family are wasting their time browsing Baby Centre tbh.

[seeker]

I think it's a brilliant idea. People say horrible things. And other people are insulting in prurient speculation under the guise of "concern".

[seeker]

Indulging not insulting.

[pumpkinsweetie]

I can only think it is a good thing.
Respect for the family in a time when they don't need bitching about when they don't know if their daughter is alive or dead.

[AMumInScotland]

Even if the family never look at Baby Centre, the people who run Baby Centre have to consider whether that kind of discussion is something they want to set the tone of their forums. Sounds like it isn't, and they have the right to make that choice and ban the topic. They probably also ban all kind of other topics that they find inappropriate for their forum, and their reputation.

[HerOffTheInternet]

absolute strangers debating who's fault it is your DD may or may not be dead is NOT in the 'nature of being in the public eye'

[NimChimpsky]

"Surely that's just the nature of being in the public eye?"

Well firstly, I don't think they are in the public eye per se. The abduction is.

And what statements like that do is put some sort of onus on the family. As if they deserve the disgusting sentiments directed at them when instead we all have the power as individuals to choose the sentiments we express. You can't excuse the decisions of indivduals or publications by mentioning a thoroughly unwanted 'fame'.

Sadly, if the only way a forum can hold back people who are too unthinking to censor the outpourings of their own unnecessary thoughts is by censoring them entirely, then that's the way it has to be.

[halcyondays]

They are in the public eye, but not through choice. They have none nothing wrong, lots of children play outside near their homes, they don't deserve horrible comments.

[CaseyShraeger]

I think it's a good idea TBH. The threads everywhere whenever something like this hpens are just nasty, smug, prurient, judgemental crap. And I disagree that it's a good idea to "debate" the life of another real person particularly when of the people "debating" know virtually nothing of the real facts. It's human suffering being used as self-validatory entertainment and I can't imagine a forum that wouldn't be better off without it.

[KenLeeeeeee]

I've seen some truly disgusting comments in other forums - one going as far as actually saying the parents are "accountable", so personally I'm glad that BabyCentre are taking steps to stop it.

I loathe censorship normally, but in this instance I'm more concerned about the feelings of that poor family.

[CaseyShraeger]

And we haven't even started yet on the posters who've had a mystical dream, or just a really strong feeling, and who are wondering whether they should contact the police to offer the vast benefit of their crackpot theories and are being encouraged to do so by other posters . Uggghhh.

[Why, yes, I was on MN during the McCann affair, what was it that tipped you off?]

[PatriciaHolm]

The less purient, fevered speculation the better.

[squeakytoy]

I would say public eye by choice is absolutely no comparison to being in the public eye through an event such a this.

The speculation I have seen posted has been quite nasty, and of no help whatsoever to the situation.

[Empusa]

"Exactly Whitecherry - freedom of speech, debate, discussion - all healthy."

You are aware it's a privately owned forum right? Freedom of speech doesn't apply.

[Whitecherry]

The April Jones case aside..... How do they decide the untouchable subjects?

[Whitecherry]

Already, on the thread here on MN. Someone local was persuaded to ring in with some info....might be a missing piece.