By Ann Cooper
News site comment sections like the ones at the end of each West Side Rag story long ago replaced the old newspaper “letters to the editor” column. Those columns ran a relative handful of reader messages, usually confining them to the paper’s op-ed page. The letters that did make it to print often appeared days after the articles they referenced.
In stark contrast, comments (assuming they get a moderator’s approval) can appear online, at the end of the story they’re addressing, almost immediately after that story is published. They can add new information, correct mistakes, or spark a whole new comment-conversation on a topic – all in real time.
But here’s an open secret in the news business: Comment sections are so 10 years ago. That is roughly the time when a few prominent media outlets first announced they were eliminating comments.
One of the very first was Popular Science, a magazine with a 150-year-plus history. Its September 2013 letter to readers blamed trolls and spambots for “undermining bedrock scientific doctrine [by posting disinformation] beneath our own stories, within a website devoted to championing science.”
Trolls and spambots can be blocked, as can ad hominem attacks, false information, foul language, and other material that news sites typically decline to publish in their moderated comments sections.
But moderation takes time and resources – increasingly so, say editors, as our national discourse has grown less civil. And as uncivility has increased, the resources to block it by moderation are shrinking.
That, in essence, was the explanation Gannett gave last year when it announced most of its roughly 200 daily newspapers would no longer allow reader comments on their websites. Journalists at Gannett, the country’s largest newspaper chain, had moderated the comments, but “changes in staffing” (a euphemism for the hundreds of layoffs Gannett had announced in previous months) meant it was no longer possible “to bring you a safe, moderated and productive discussion space.”
Comment sections have grown so infamous for spawning nasty discourse that they were spoofed in a recent New Yorker cartoon, depicting a woman of ancient Greece sitting with a computer above the caption: DESPITE ALL WARNINGS, PANDORA OPENED THE COMMENTS SECTION.
Last week, I introduced you to Rag comments moderator Bobby Tannenhauser. When we spoke recently, I asked him if the Rag might one day go the way of Popular Science, Reuters, CNN, Gannett, and so many other news organizations that have killed comments.
“I don’t want to cut them out,” Tannenhauser told me, “because I think that cuts out a connection that the community has with us and with each other. I think that would not be a good idea.”
I also asked Tannenhauser if there were ways he thought comments could be improved. Not surprisingly, he suggested commenters shouldn’t just post criticisms. “Instead….ask: ‘Hey, how would you fix it? What would make it better?’”
And then he offered this idea: Commenters with very strong opinions should write out their thoughts. Then, before posting, “defend the other side. Write a contrary opinion that makes sense, that makes the arguments.” By thinking through the opposite point of view, he said, “maybe there could be a dialogue – if you could understand that there’s a reason for someone else’s opinion.”
If you try Tannenhauser’s suggestion, let us know what you think of it – in the comments section, of course.
Subscribe to West Side Rag’s FREE email newsletter here, and help sustain the Rag by clicking on the purple support button below.
Excellent ideas.
Reality is happening all around us, but the really important things happen outside our direct line of sight. In those cases, we are forced to rely on (mostly human) messengers to tell us what happened. Unfortunately, these messengers/journalists/reporters do not have a good track record. Further their interests are entrenched, meaning they have an institutional bias.
Thus our leaders know we must eat the ‘slightly sloped roof’ narratives we are being fed. We have no choice. It’s saddening and distressing.
Comment sections allow us to collaborate, commiserate, and grieve our condition.
Without the comments section, I’m not sure I would come here as often. These are nice suggestions, but I also like seeing the unfiltered and at times unhinged inner thoughts of the people around me. I’m a big boy, I can take it.
Agreed. Filter out the truly offensive garbage (i.e. racist, etc.) as well as posts that are repetitive (WSR does not do this enough). But when in doubt, publish it. As has been stated here repeatedly, the writers and management here are great, but moderation is very inconsistent.
To your point, I would not visit nearly as much without the comments. If this business is being run properly, I’m guessing the huge incremental number of visits due to comments generates enough additional ad revenue to cover the cost of the moderator.
I would guess the moderator checks in several times a day, goes through the comments in 20-30 minutes, and that’s about it. I’m sure there are plenty of retirees or stay-at-home parents who would be thrilled to be paid a very small hourly wage much lower than the revenue generated to do this.
are you advocating for a cut in pay for the moderator? i hope he makes the equivalent of a union wage, no matter if he is retired or other circumstances. this is NYC! and his work is valuable.
When did I say that? Why do you constantly need to be making trouble around here trying to sound so righteous? I’m saying it is an easy job to fill and there are plenty of people who can do it at a cost-effective price. Comments are a very important feature but I recognize the need to have some kind of moderation but I also recognize the need of the owners to pay their bills. Basic economics.
Please stop. You are looking for reasons to be angry.
The comments are the most entertaining facet of any Blog! Please keep them!
Totally agree. Keep it civil, but keep it free.
I used to hang out on another board with a bunch of people who shared an interest. We had an online community. Then the board was taken over by another outfit that did not want many comments. The whole thing pretty much dried up. I would only filter out obnoxious or egregiously off-topic comments. It is good to get perspectives from other people, though a waste of time and energy to have to wade through egregious rudeness.
Comments were done away with en masse for one reason only: the discourse could not be controlled and the harm to approved narratives became too great. It’s called censorship. It’s the same reason why netflix got rid of reviews of its movies long ago and why youtube got rid of the downvote on videos. As for the rag, I suggest to stop moderating content and only enforce the rules of civility, etc. I think a lot of people actually enjoy the comment section and feel that it gives them a voice.
Right on, Shelly!
I would visit WSR much less often without the ability to engahe by reading and writing comments. I’ve found that I am already visiting WSR less often, because of the mobile phone glitch that prevents me from responding to comments.
I also question the view of comments as a relic. My other online info sources are primarily NY Times and Washington Post. Both of these allow comments for many articles. Commenters learn from each other and build a community with each other. WaPo is unmoderated, though readers can report a comment after the fact, and can block users from appearing in their comment feed. NYTimes seems only lightly moderated, and perhaps by bots. If WSR finds it tedious or problematic to moderate comments, perhaps try what other sites are doing to keep information flowing and communites engaged.
I too would come to the site less often if the comments section were eliminated. True, there are the now-predictable usually negative comments, but I like knowing what my neighbors are thinking. And I’m truly interested in most of the comments.
What would you think about posting whatever one wants to say….but using full name to identify sender? It’s very easy to degrade someone or ideas without being identified. In other words, if you really believe something….defend it.
This could not be policed. How would anyone know your full name?
I prefer to keep things the way they are. I am an infrequent commenter but would not want to use my actual name simply for privacy purposes. Using my name I would have to edit the content so as not to reveal something that might be used nefariously by someone else. And I do appreciate the content moderation of this site. As it is, things often get heated in the comments section. Without moderation it might become tedioius, too voluminous and ultimately unreadable.
Tweaking Carlos’ suggestion, use unpaid volunteers who you vet in person first. Reward and recognize them once a year at the “WSR Gala” with venue, food, and drink provided by local advertisers/donors who are also recognized there.
Contrary to Bruce’s insulting implication that I am a nasty person trying to deny people their wages, I am fine with the moderator(s) being paid for their time. Perhaps the moderator could moderate out people like him who hurl unfound insults at other posters.
I find it astonishing how many commenters warn that they’ll stop reading the Rag if the comments are taken away. In these people’s minds, is the news content so lacking, or is the desire to read comments just the literary equivalent of rubber-necking when passing an accident? When I click on the comments, I gird myself for vitriol, belly-aching, and general nastiness. (And that’s AFTER the vetting has been done: I can only imagine what we’d see if there were no moderator.) Part of me wishes all commenters were required to give their full, real names, but while this might induce people to be more charitable and constructive in their comments, it would also make them vulnerable to all sorts of harassment. I do keep clicking on the comments, and some days I’m rewarded, such as today, when one commenter on the article about the 81st Street elevator construction gave a shout-out to a local dog named Wiggles–that makes me feel a part of the community and, to my mind, justifies the continued existence of the comments section.
The owners of WSR do an incredible job. But they only post once or twice a day. So without comments, most people wouldn’t need to come more often than that. It is very simple math. Commenters are providing free content for them. Frankly, that is what keeps the lights on. Basic media math.
If you don’t like it, ignore it. It is really easy. And if you think these comments are bad, then you really need to get out of your bubble. I think they are very tame (too tame – wish their was less moderation). It is healthy to see what other people think. Especially because on WSR, those who are “the other side” are still generally well to the left of much of America.
Trumpers live in their Fox News media bubble, which is horrible. But those who never leave the liberal UWS are also somewhat to blame (though definitely less so).
As an avid reader of the WSR, but an infrequent commenter or reader of comments, I like to have the option to be able to read other people’s thoughts, especially when the subject matter is important to me. I don’t feel forced to read any or all of them and I use my personal filter in doing so. I think (assuming that we’re talking about adult readership) if we could all have a little more tolerance of “other” opinions, and if we re-read what we have written, before we publish in the comments section, we would not be faced with censorship. How wonderful it is that we are all still unique and interested enough to comment. I appreciate the magnitude of our combined exuberance for our Upper West Side community and the diversity of all our ideas.
Let’s face it the big news outlets don’t want anyone to suggest that their coverage is biased or wrong. That is really why they have done away with comments.
I don’t agree with the first part. “Letters to the editor” columns are alive and well. They are now usually a part of the Opinion section. Having a limited space is also a positive. And coming a few days later rarely matters.
Appreciate the article, comments and the work it takes to make it all happen. Truly 365-degree service journalism.
Comments – from invariably improving every NYT recipe to augmenting lists, research, etc. –
create community while diversifying point of view. So valuable.
Truth is some people just can’t have nice things. They destroy community and detest diversity. So it is with comments.
Go in good health, o great Rag. And thank you for sticking with us and doing the hard work !
Get rid of ’em. Our culture is glutted with cheap opinions and narcissists. I get the irony of my saying this. Delete mine, too.
There are ways to deal with the obscene, racist, and nasty people who are forever rearing their ugly heads on the Internet. WSR, the NYT, and the Wa Po do it. But the wholesale elimination of comments by Popular Science, Reuters, et al was throwing away the baby with the bath water. I love getting away from the ofttimes stilted, journalistic format (not the WSR!) and diving deeply into the Comments sections, with the colorful and often humorous writing styles of the lay folk. It’s fun and there’s often much to be learned from the information and perspectives therein.
I once suggested that every week they should publish all the comments WWR censored. That comment was censored. Will this one be?
Take a moment to think about how that couldn’t easily be done technically. Not only would the site need a save feature for discarded comments, but they would also need to be sorted by article.
I moderated forums for years. It wouldn’t be that hard. And I guarantee it would get a lot of traffic.
As an avid reader of the WSR, but an infrequent commenter or reader of comments, I like to have the option to be able to read other people’s thoughts, especially when the subject matter is important to me. I don’t feel forced to read any or all of them and I use my personal filter in doing so. I think if we could all have a little more tolerance of “other” opinions, and if we re-read what we have written, before we publish in the comments section, we would not be faced with censorship. How wonderful it is that we are all still unique and interested enough to comment. I appreciate the magnitude of our combined exuberance for our Upper West Side community and the diversity of all our ideas.
Leave the comments alone or I’m leaving the website. Adults can handle comments
Same here. I’d have no interest in reading the WSR without a robust and mostly unfiltered comments section. The WSR news that I’m interested in is available elsewhere but knowing what my neighbors think makes the WSR interesting and informative.
Sometimes the comments tell on themselves, like the one that said that it is politically inconvenient for UWS politicians to stick their necks out for Muslims being profiled and messed with on the UWS due to the Israel conflict.
I only want to hear the sound of my own voice. 🙂
Am not wishing to display incivility when pointing out that “uncivility” is not a word.
The problem with an understanding, is that although an understanding is necessary, oftentimes one side does not want to have an understanding and sees the other as beneath them. For example, the anti-car crowd sees those that drive cars as worse than someone that robs a store.