Curbed Atlanta promotes racist hate speech and bans those who speak against it.

Curbed Atlanta is the Atlanta local incarnation for Vox Media owned Curbed.com which features localized real estate and development news.

With a recent change in website template, the curbed Atlanta website has also taken to banning those members who speak out against racism. While at the same time keeping editors who receive their paycheck from Vox Media employed who make disparaging remarks about people based on their race.

Most recently, commentor “Id of Shkreli” was banned.

How the SJW’s welcome you to their site after you call them out on doublespeak.

Commentor Id of Shkreli was banned, according to Curbed, for two offences:

1 Having an offensive user name

2 Making comments that were either sexist, racist or bigoted

We will show how both those claims are completely untrue. Furthermore, we will show how Curbed and Vox media are both hypocritical and arrogant in their behavior.

We are completely unclear how the username “Id of Shkreli” is offensive or would need to be banned. Contact was made with Curbed.com through appropriate channels and no response has yet been received.

Notice the virtue signalling language, “Tell us why you are a good person”

Martin Shkreli is a New York pharmaceutical executive who specializes in developing niche drugs that have too little profit potential for the large drug companies to pursue. He does this because he knows these treatments and cures would not be developed if it weren’t for him. His efforts literally keep people from being ill, as ill, or dying.

What kind of companies would find someone who dedicates hos life to saving other’s lives as offensive? The answer: Vox media and Curbed.com.

Even if a company didn’t realize the life saving work that Shkreli does ( https://youtu.be/HXVQOZDKlRE ) and instead bought into a caricatured image painted by an unfair media, what makes the use of his name so offensive that it can not even be seen? Or to take away the right of a user of their website to repeat that name or use it in their username?

Obviously something else is going on here: A website, ostensibly dedicated to local real estate, is taking sides on cultural issues and banning anyone who doesn’t have the same opinions as they do.

Notice how on their website, where they have set up a contact method for people who have been banned, they arrogantly ask individuals, “Tell us why you are a good person”. As if they are Gods and users must cower and plead before them to be judged worthy individuals. And as if admiring a man, Shkreli, who dedicates his life to helping sick people makes someone a “bad” person.

A Kids playground

Curbed Atlanta covered a new playground that was built in an existing park in Atlanta.

http://atlanta.curbed.com/2016/2/25/11110640/chastain-park-unveils-playground-redevelopment-

The article was fairly typical for a Curbed piece. They copied most of the information from an existing website, in this case chastainparkconservancy.org, and added some glib and snarky comments in with it.

They also included some pictures:

The first commentor on the article noticed that all the children in the photos with the article were *gasp* white.

Disparaging comments against white are totally fine with Vox Media

That set the tone for the comments section with more people jumping on board to make a playground for children into a race and class issue:

In the face of harsh race and class criticism from other commentors, commentor BulldogBen tried to frame the issue:

In other words, rich people have the government pay for all their goodies while not rich people have to “crowd source”, aka rise their own money, for their playgrounds. After which now banned commentor, “Id of Shkreli” says he directed BulldogBen to the original article at chastainparkconservancy.org that indicated the all the funds for this playground were privately raised. A fact that the writers at Curbed could have easily included had their intention not been to incite class hostility.

But Id of Shkreli had seen other times where commentors had made racist comments against white people or had used class warfare ideas, and added another comment to explain that the race and social hate really wasn’t even about the playground at all:

Harsh? Sure. Why not? It’s totally appropriate to call out people who disparage kids playing in a playground because of their skin color.

The Irony

The irony of the situation is the reason that Curbed gave for banning the account of Id of Shkreli:

It’s ironic because Id of Shkreli was pointing out and fighting against racist comments. His comment, though maybe harsh, was neither sexist, racist or bigoted.

There was, however, a comment on the article that *was* racist and bigoted and that comment remains to this day as does the account of the person who wrote it:

Curbed could have removed that comment at the least, but they chose not to. How can Curbed say that it doesn’t “tolerate any form of sexism, racism. or bigotry” while at the same time leaving racist and bigoted comments to remain while removing comments that call out hate speech?

Something else is clearly going on here. Curbed and Vox media aren’t really against all racism and bigotry. They are only against racism and bigotry against some groups, but they are totally for it against other groups of people.

Think that sounds too crazy to be true? Well read on…

It Gets Even Worse

Allowing racist comments to stand while banning those who call out racist comments and accusing them of racism is bad enough. But what about the editors and writers of Curbed Atlanta?

In an article published April of 2015, Micheal Kahn who is an associate editor at Curbed as well as an architect at Rosser International, wrote an article about public transportation issues in the Atlanta area.

But Kahn couldn’t help but thrown is a disparaging racial comment:

Pasty-whiteness? What’s that?

So, white people are unhealthy and lifeless? A certainly odd, but nonetheless disparaging remark. What does it add to the story? Nothing.

It’s a strange and deliberate why to make an unnecessary racial dig. In other words, it’s racist and bigoted. It demeans a group for no other reason than their race.

The comment section was quick to point out the racist nature of the jibe. Despite that, and the fact that the term “pasty-whiteness” adds no value to the article, the term was not removed. It fact, it still remains in the article almost a full year later.

The fact is, Curbed and Vox media have a policy that states:

Yet they allow racist jibes to remain in thier articles they wrote for a whole year without removing them. Yet they allow a person who makes disparaging comments against whites to be on staff. Yet they allow bigoted comments about white children on a playground to stand in the comments section. And if you call them out on it… they ban you.

Clearly, Curbed.com and Vox Media are hypocrites and are totally okay with racism… As long as it’s the right kind of racism for them.

Show your support

Clapping shows how much you appreciated Atl Investigators’s story.