Ecorazzi uncommitted to facts?

Recently Ecorazzi published the article, A Proud Vegan’s Riposte to “The Vegan Cult” (which plays on the name Alex Proud, the author of a Telegraph piece on veganism which the article discusses).

I made a comment on this statement:

Mr. Proud, we are the only species that feeds on another’s mother’s milk and continues after weaning.

I said that we’re not the only species that feeds on the milk of other animals, and included a YouTube video and an article from a zoology journal to support my point.

The video was of a cow allowing a kid to suckle from her:

There are numerous cases of young animals nursing from other species when they have no mother of their own.

The article was about how western gulls and feral cats would take milk from elephant seals.

That article maintains similar behaviour also occurs in other sea birds. On a different level, some species of ants control and ‘milk’ aphids and other insects by stroking them with their antennae.

This obviously doesn’t – and wasn’t meant to – cast doubt over the value of the Ecorazzi post, as milk drinking in other species isn’t central. It simply raises an error in fact.

My comment wasn’t approved. Why would any site that purports to offer serious commentary on anything ignore the facts?

However Ecorazzi does allow ‘freewheeling’ comments like the one that follows:

Comment1

Usually comments on news sites – which Ecorazzi is to some extent – are allowed unless they’re offensive or threatening.

If they’re noted, contradict the published line, yet are valid – the story is revised and an update notice published, something along the lines of:

An earlier version of this article claimed that X does not occur. While this claim did not detract from the central theme of the article, the claim has been corrected, since X does occur, although it may not be that common.

The least they should do, though, is allow comments that show the facts of an article are wrong – not pretend they don’t exist.

Do they want to publish things in good faith, aiming to be as true as they can, or avoid letting facts get in the way of a good story?

Advertisements