Slashdot Mirror


Citibank Cancels Bank Account of Objectionable Blogger

Keith found this story about Citibank blocking a website's bank account after deciding that the site's blog contained questionable content. I guess it's up to a bank to decide whom to do business with, but this is pretty crazy.

4 of 265 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Because it's a gay site? Or is it because... by Anonymusing · · Score: 5, Informative

    First, the bank ALREADY HAS HIS INFORMATION because of his bank account. You think he somehow signed up for a checking account without filling out contact information? Citibank doesn't hand out accounts on street corners.

    Second, the startup apparently has backing from "The Washington Post Company, Mayfield Fund’s Allen Morgan, Xing founder Lars Hinrichs, and Burson-Marsteller’s Don Baer." E.g. people with money and connections. Hardly a mysterious, unknown person.

    Third, they didn't say this was a compliance failure. They said it was because of "objectionable content."

    --
    Liberal? Conservative? Compare perspectives at Left-Right
  2. Re:Because it's a gay site? Or is it because... by just_another_sean · · Score: 4, Informative

    Explain real world contact info. Jason Goldberg links two news articles that contain a lot of data on who founded and invested in this company. If you take a sec to google him there is plenty of data on him here: Jason Goldberg on Crunchbase. What? Because his contact info on the site is info@fabulis.com? That's pretty standard actually. Just because he doesn't list his home phone number and personal email address doesn't make him anonymous. He doesn't seem to have anything to hide, quite the contrary actually given the nature of the site. Just because he doesn't list his personal contact info for you to contact doesn't mean Citibank doesn't have it.

    My guess is that this is a good old fashion case of homophobia. Especially after reading this: Update on story.

    --
    Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal
  3. Re:Shut up by treeves · · Score: 4, Informative

    NCUA : credit unions :: FDIC : banks

    not a good reason

    --
    ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
  4. Re:Because it's a gay site? Or is it because... by just_another_sean · · Score: 4, Informative

    The company I work for has an online site and we don't post any of our direct contact info. You have to fill out a contact us form. Of course we sell boring shit so there is nothing a bank might find objectionable. The bank obviously has his contact info and made no attempt to explain to him before closing his account that he might need to add some detail to his site out of concern for his customers. They shut it down without notice and then said his content was questionable. Not his business practices, not his site design and not a lack of data. His *content* was in question, pure and simple.

    Did you even read the blog? Did you try to do any verification on who Jason Goldberg is before you wrote your post? Banks fund some of the most dubious shit you could imagine and as long as they are getting paid they don't generally give a hit about what you are doing unless it is so obviously illegal that they feel they might get caught up in it and therefore the risk outweighs the gain. It's obvious that Citibank as a company doesn't feel thsi way, they apologized and reinstated his account. But I still think this started as some homophobic conservative getting up in arms over what he percieved as just another Un-American attempt to further the gay/lesbian/communist/liberal/neo-liberal-monarchist agenda.

    --
    Creationist Textbook Stickers Declared Unconstitutional by CowboyNeal