ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Books, Literature, and Writing»
  • Commercial & Creative Writing

Your subject does not conform with our editorial policy. Welcome to the Machine

Updated on July 9, 2013

This banner would be appropriate. But an important part of the discussion cannot be written about.

The word for commonly accepted reason for an abortion cannot be used.
The word for commonly accepted reason for an abortion cannot be used. | Source

These are words of doom from a publisher.

Hub pages are a publisher. Therefore they make their living off of advertising. In order to do that they must sell advertising to companies. For companies to buy their advertising they have to advertise to the companies. The companies will buy the advertising if the publishers’ standards and audience match their own criteria. Then price and duration are bargained for, and agreed upon.

The system is good and workable. However the advertisers have the money, the Search engines want the money and there are a whole heck of a lot of publishers who have no bargaining power at all.

Really poor online art/poetry/music does not care. Really good stuff does not care. So right now the only driving force to reckon with at all are money making publishers. Certainly not the artists.

The ---- of Nanking is to this day an issue in Sino-Japanese relations.

In order to meet the standards publishers use electronic monitoring of certain undesirable words and phrases and prevent them from being in association with ads that place restrictions on content around them. There is a word that cannot be used in Hub pages. And there is another that sometimes cannot be used. Both words start with the letter “r” and end with a silent “e”. In another order the letters can spell pear and care. But in the banned arrangement the “A” has a long “a” sound. I think you get the point.

However I somewhat agree with the notion, if it were done by humans.

If you use those words you will probably get a $ symbol which means no advertising on your hub or this dreaded notice: Your subject does not conform with our editorial policy. (Please notice that the notice is grammatically wrong, clearly the “with” should be “to”) So my point is really about the system. Machines and most algorythms simply cannot yet excecute the skill of discernment. Quality of publishing requires discernment.

A light flashes in the dark

You cannot see what the problem is, just that there is a problem.
You cannot see what the problem is, just that there is a problem. | Source

Do you remember these phrases

"Does not Compute"


How about "danger danger danger will Robinson"

Do you remember HAL and Dave in 2001 Space Odyssey?

I remember buying a new company car back in 1988 it was a Maxima from Nissan. I swear if you forgot to turn off your lights it would say what sounded like "Lights are on" which was way cool. But the freaky thing was is was programmed to sound more like "rights areon". Which was scary.

Thank goodness the later Star Trek had an android to make it all real. But we will never forget R2 D2.

Welcome to the Machine

Please think about it.

cold or over heated
I like all the above. But I darn sure know them for what they are.

A strange computer

I have had bad bosses and judges. But I must say that they were bad because they were unpredictable. I have run into bad machines and I must say they were bad because they were unreliable.

My favorite heckling line to an umpire/ref is: Can we play by the same rules as your favorite team.

I never minded a strict ref. When he was consistently strict. But my favorite refs were ones that tried hard to let us try hard and play the game.

Online writing rules are mostly just dandy. Everyone of reasonable mental acuity can play by the rules. But when machines are doing the judging we run into real problems.

The obvious simple solution is to have enough folks overseeing a program so that anomalies and strange results can be instantly personally challenged and corrected or not.

The reason for not doing this is two-fold. Programmers fight and proclaim their program is better than humans and bean counters hate for people to have a job.

We can do better as the graph shows there are good parts to all aspects, synergism is the key not isolation and power struggles and cheap anti-labor attitudes.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Ericdierker profile image

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Interesting. Thanks for the note. Like I said it does not ban the article just advertising on it.

    • cascoly profile image

      cascoly 4 years ago from seattle

      there are currently over 900 results for a search for 'rape' on HP -- considering how much self-inflicted damage was done to republican candidates this year, i'd be surprised if it were banned

    • Ericdierker profile image

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Greensleeves Hubs, How wonderful your words and deep thought are to a weary warrior. I hope I did not seem to whine. In fact I love the parameters set by our delicate balancing act. To be sure HP did it right for HP, and therefor all my lovers and friends here. The hub is published, it drives traffic to my other hubs and is a great point of discussion for serious writers or not so serious that are interested in serious writers. Make no doubt I published this hub which made reference and clearly go the point across and has advertising.

      But do not tell my radicals that -- bad for publicity;-)

    • Greensleeves Hubs profile image

      Greensleeves Hubs 4 years ago from Essex, UK

      Hi Ericdierker; this article was of interest to me, because I do have some personal experience of this, and because I have a strong belief in freedom of speech.

      As far as freedom of speech is concerned, I hate the idea of any word which isn't a gross swear word being banned, because the banning of free speech is the first step down the road to a censored, unfree society. Having said that, I think in this case you are quite right that it is just an unfortunate consequence of the necessity on a large site of using computer filters to make decisions about possibly offensive articles, instead of human beings who have the capability of applying common sense. These two common words (which can be used uncontroversially and seriously) should not lead to a ban on adverts, even when used in politically sensitive contexts.

      Which brings me to my experience. I wrote a hub about the farm crop Canola, which also goes by another name of r**e or r**eseed (I won't use the word here just in case it causes you a problem!) The ban on adverts was immediate, even tho' my article was using the word in a totally non-sexual-crime context. I wrote to HubPages and they sensibly reviewed and immediately lifted the ban.

      Hopefully if you write a serious, objective hub containing these words, even applying to them their most sensitive contexts, then on request the HubPage staff will override the automatic filter. However, any later changes to the hub will probably then retrigger the filter. So there is on HubPages the option to get human beings to check out the hub - it's not an ideal solution, but sadly today the risk of legal action or loss of advertising revenue make publishers very sensitive and possibly overly strict with their automatic filters. Best wishes, Alun.