It Would Be Fun to Run a Newspaper
Post title courtesy of Charles Foster Kane – who I believe would agree with my assessment below…
I read the Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News online almost every day. Even if I’m busy a quick scan of both sites provide me a stomach full of what’s happening in the city. Even though these two papers are owned by the same company, both have unique attributes and writers, and I appreciate the access to both.
One development that’s now fully evolved in both dailies is the incorporation of articles written by readers into their newspapers, both online and print. The Denver Post has “Your Hub,” which is an entire section written by readers and contributors. Many times a headline on Denverpost.com will link directly to a “Your Hub” article, so instead of reading an article by a journalist you are now reading a rant from “Debbie in Aurora.” Some are well written, others aren’t. But there’s little separation between this and the professional content, and I don’t like that.
Newspapers are in bad shape financially. I haven’t touched a print paper in months, and I can’t remember the last time I’ve ever purchased a newspaper. However even if the majority of content is now online a newspaper IS an important presence in a city. It always has been and I hope it always will be. That air of authority a daily paper carries is why I prefer articles written by long standing writers, (syndicated or local,) and columnists over local residents. Other than “letters to the editors” I believe that the “neighborhood beat” pieces should NOT be swallowed up into the pages of these papers. Articles written by amateurs, (myself included,) have their place – but NOT as a constant part of a major daily.
My other gripe is the incorporation of comments in the articles. Similar to blogs, almost every professionally written article is now followed by a slew of comments written by everyone and anyone with something to say. Important yet divisive articles on immigration, politics, and religion are always trailed by hundreds of back and forth lines by many of the same commentors, and almost always deteriorate into insults and name calling.
Unfortunately such long strings of comments don’t paint the residents of our fine state and city in a very positive light. Very few stay on topic, and it seems few comments are screened unless they contain blatant profanity or the worst of derogatory terms.
Every Boulder story is followed by snarky comments mocking it’s liberal leanings. Many, too many comments bash Hispanics, (often on articles that have nothing to do with immigration.) Even a non biased fluff article like “Gay Pride wrap-up” receives hundreds of views exposing angry personal opinions. And conversely an article about suburban mega churches net angry leftist prose about how religion is the root of all things medieval and antiquated. Pick a random article and read through the comments: Drivers hate cyclists. Cyclists hate SUVS. Gays hate everything in Colorado Springs. Liberals hate the suburbs. Light rail opponents insult and chastise those in favor. Those in favor of such city initiatives call opponents militant rednecks. These repetitive and inflammatory comments take away from what the article, especially if a commentary, is actually saying.
Today’s front (online) page of the Rocky Mountain News features a banal story about a road restriping error in remote northwestern county. Knowing that summer in Colorado often leads to tensions between motorists and cyclists, and there’s already been numerous articles about “sharing the road,” am I stretching to think that this piece is just trolling for agitated readers and huffy comments? Are articles being written for their value alone, or more so to instigate “discussion” among readers? If the latter, then the writer is under the influence to coerce the style and manner in which the original article is written in fishing for return commenters.
Web 2.0 is wonderful. It allows one to engage in immediate debate and discussion on any topic, whether breaking news or ancient history. Bloggers and commenters SHOULD be respected for taking the time to write their opinions and share their thoughts. Blogs equal the playing field and give the little guy a global voice. One sole post, (hey maybe this one,) can challenge and TAKE ON a big company.
However some platforms should maintain a respectful level of dignity, and I don’t think the two largest and most influential newspapers in the state should display the unfettered rantings of hundreds behind every article. At the very least its embarrassing when you consider people worldwide read these two papers online.
Why not allow readers to submit their comments, and then have someone review them and select which ones are posted? If the comment is insightful and engaging THEN approve it. I’d rather read 10-20 well thought out smart comments than 250 repetitive insults. Many online papers already follow this method, and while it certainly requires some extra time it will filter out the nonsense, insults, and garbage – and allow readers to absorb the BEST writing by our most well spoken citizens.
So how about it Denver newspapers? Let’s start moderating so we can achieve some moderation. You’ll save some bandwidth too.
James Van Dellen
Re “…am I stretching to think that this piece is just trolling for agitated readers and huffy comments?” I don’t think the media have to troll for people to leave snarky, critical, negative or, unfortunately, even hateful comments about just about every subject. Some people do it without being sought out.
For my part, I’d rather scroll past the drivel than have someone censor what appears on-line. Comments give a picture of what people think and are willing to write — even if we don’t care for their thoughts or words. Who said something like, “I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend your right to say it”?
Hi James. I’m breaking news editor at The Denver Post. I will address some of your concerns.
First, the papers are not owned by the same company. The Denver Post is owned by Media News Group, and the Rocky Mountain News is owned by Scripps. The Denver Newspaper Agency handles circulation and ad sales for both newspapers.
Second, Your Hub is a Scripps concept and is under the DNA. The Post is not involved in its online or print production, although print copies are distributed with The Post through our agreement with the DNA. The Post website does link to Your Hub, just as we link to DNA classified ads.
The Post product online that allows readers to post content is Neighbors (http://neighbors.denverpost.com/)
You are right that we do not screen comments that online readers post to our stories. We respond to requests to remove comments that violate our terms and conditions of use, including profanity and copyright infringement.
We want to be an open forum for ideas, whether or not we or our readers agree with the content of those ideas.
Some online news sites allow no comments, others screen comments before posting them. We have chosen to be as open to readers as possible.
I appreciate your thoughtful analysis of what we do. It’s encouraging in this unsettling media market to see an appetite for local news.
Feel free to contact me directly if you’d like to talk further.
Hi Vikki – thank you VERY much for that response.
If you check the article I referenced yesterday you’ll see what looks like about 40-60 comments now. Out of all those, the most logical comment I see comes from JB who writes:
My thoughts exactly
My wish isn’t to cease reader input, but when discussions deteriorate so far off topic they reach the ridiculous there’s nothing wrong with steering them back on course.
Its easy to jump on your keyboard and mash out a quick insult. (I’ve done it.) But it takes time and thought to construct an intelligent response that supports or dissuades the opinion of the article or a fellow poster. (I try to do that more.)
I think comment moderation should go above and beyond copyright and profanity issues. Almost all blogs and online forums have some sort of moderation. This isn’t to stymie opinions, but rather to keep the discussions relevant while weeding out off-topic trolls and attacks.
Moderating comments isn’t censorship or bias. Sometimes comment discussions take a healthy flow from one topic to the next, but when a thread is populated by people calling each other douche bags, retards, and idiots – then it subtracts from the REAL issue and discussion. And even though the newspaper boards do have filters to prevent foul language I still read rants against ethnic groups, (ok Mexicans,) – that have nothing to do with the original news stories. That kinda bugs me.
Even if the papers won’t selectively post comments, (like I suggested,) perhaps the web content managers could monitor the comments closer? I see nothing wrong with deleting comments containing the above examples in order to keep the discussion civil.
As mentioned I read both papers daily and appreciate the work of our local writers, and Vikki’s work too. I’m a proud resident of our city and state, and no matter what our political and social differences I want our voices to reflect the best of our citizens.
Thanks again for your note and for taking the time to respond – I really do appreciate it.
james…
p.s. I’m kind of a newspaper insider too. I used to deliver the “Grand Rapids Press” every afternoon as a kid.
And speaking of off-topic comments: Why on earth does the Denver Daily News exist?
James, I have had the same concerns about comments on news sites. I visit the 9News website every day – they recently revamped the site and now allow comments on their news stories. I do think that people should be allowed to express their opinion, and I enjoy reading what other people have to say; however, more often than not I find myself cringing at the rude, off-topic, or insulting comments that people post. Here in public radio land, we have discussed the possibility of opening up our site to comments. I have looked closely at how National Public Radio handles this issue. They do reserve the right to screen and edit comments, and they seem to use a light touch. I think it works very well for them, and it makes me actually want to scroll down far enough to read the comments. It is a sensitive issue though – no easy solutions!
Anyway, what I really want to say is that I HATE SUVs, politicians, the war, and cilantro – and anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot.
-Robin
Thanks for that input Robin, and Claire too. Yes I’ve seen the 9News site and my feelings on it are the same.
If the contributors on the local news boards were as well spoken and considerate as my readers I wouldn’t even be thinking about this.
James, one way that I think comments could be cleaned up is through a voting system that helps the most thoughtful comments float to the top. This has been attempted at some sites, but I haven’t seen it done well yet. Assuming it could be done, perhaps comments would improve since thoughtful readers’ comments would receive more visibility rather than being stuck behind fast-commenting racists?
And, if the racist comments were essentially buried, perhaps those commenters would also get the hint?
One system I’ve heard of that can help is a 2-vote system where you rate a comment on a 1-5 scale for quality and also on whether you agree/disagree with the comment. This is similar to what Amazon has done, where people are most interested in reading quality positive and negative reviews.