6 reasons we’re lazy about story comments

September 3, 2009 by Kurt · Comments
Filed under: commenting 

reclinerMy most recent column for the American Society of News Editors, for The American Editor, which will be published online only henceforth. I wrote this a couple of weeks ago, and have been waiting for ASNE to post it.

***

We have arrived at yet another spasm of consternation over the value of readers’ comments on the stories we write — at least the third such spasm in the past two years. A spate of news stories, commentaries, blog items and surveys have come out. We debate whether readers should be allowed to comment. We deplore the quality of the comments. We lament the effect they may have on our brands.

A recent item in MinnPost.com outlined the tension in newsrooms between allowing the discourse to occur unfettered and slapping restrictions on readers’ ability to comment. In particular, the story highlighted the Minneapolis Star Tribune’s decision to eliminate comments on eight categories of stories, including those involving Muslims, crime, gays and race.

A blog item on Poynter.org last month noted several examples of news organizations that had curtailed or eliminated story comments because of their concerns over quality — particularly racist rants and personal attacks on readers.

Reacting to some of this news, my own newspaper blogged about the issue of story comment quality, surveying readers on their opinion of the comments. Since the unscientific poll went up July 16, more than 700 readers have voted. Fifty-eight percent said comments should be dropped. Only 28 percent chose this option: “Worth having. But improve your system of policing them.”

That’s the option I chose. Read more