Should the Tribune/Crains eliminate their comments section?

The Urban Politician · March 6th, 2009, 03:32 PM

Seemingly without exception, every single article is followed by a string of very angry commentary from people who clearly have an axe to grind. According to them, everything is Daley's fault, and we must blame the city and its leaders for any-and-everything.

Instead of attracting constructive debate and civic discussion, the commentary section is being used by ticked off people to complain, complain, complain to no end. I'm not saying that accusing the city's leaders of wrongdoing doesn't have its place, but having read plenty of commentary sections I can say with confidence that we're seeing little else but that, and it makes one wonder if this is an experiment in internet journalism that should be continued.

Thoughts?

The Urban Politician · March 7th, 2009, 04:02 AM

Not a single comment.

Great!

chrome13 · March 7th, 2009, 04:20 AM

They're useful to take a quick peek into the minds of the deranged, which can be fun. Besides that, they are worthless.

bnk · March 7th, 2009, 04:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Urban Politician

Not a single comment.

Great!

Welcome to the dead Chicago subfourm.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showth...403463&page=22

spyguy · March 7th, 2009, 10:09 PM

I think all newspaper forums suffer from this. It's just another form of voluntary response bias.

***Jan*** · March 8th, 2009, 03:06 PM

Yeah, people armed not with facts, insights or even interpretations of those, but just with an opinion based on what they call 'common sense' or what I call 'general frustration' posting on news sites seems to be a universal problem. I skipped those toilet bowls years ago. The comments pages on the already quality poor Rotterdam Daily keep reinventing new rock bottoms when it comes to that.

Northsider · March 9th, 2009, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Not a single comment.

What's there to comment on? You are complaining about people complaining...

Jibba · March 9th, 2009, 11:22 PM

Every comment section I've ever seen has mindless venting and non-substantiated ranting. There are many reasons why this is that aren't worth getting into for the purposes of the question. For the publishers of online content, I think they feel the need to make their material feel as interactive as possible, for better or for worse. Occasionally, beneficial insight will arise out of the infinite string of crap, so there is that to be said (not much, I'll admit). At any rate, I think that the comments area functions to increase readership in one way or another; indeed, so long as the space for them is not intrusive and doesn't interfere with the overall readability of the piece they can't hurt. My personal opinion is that I would like to see them disappear so long as they continue to be a crushing reminder of how idiotic most people are. Quite entertaining most of the time, though.

Urbanight · March 10th, 2009, 12:33 AM

The NYTimes allows comments on certain articles, and they usually frame the debate by giving readers a specific question. Maybe The Tribune should try that. Maybe they need more readers to produce more intelligent debates.

paytonc · March 10th, 2009, 06:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spyguy

I think all newspaper forums suffer from this. It's just another form of voluntary response bias.

perhaps, but I wonder why newspaper fora, in particular, are such incredibly toxic breeding grounds for know-nothingism. you'd assume newspaper readers are a half-step above, say, TV watchers. I've seen few newspaper fora which don't make my eyes sting after the third snippet of verbal excreta. hell, even vile right-wing forums aren't quite as hazardous.

sure, overboard snark is the unfortunate way of the interwebs (see the Gawker empire) but sheesh, after a few Tribune comment threads I seriously feared for my safety -- if there are that many genuinely dangerous sociopaths out there, just moments from snapping into murderous rampages, I don't want to share the streets and sidewalks with 'em.

AJphx · March 10th, 2009, 10:12 AM

I remember back when Yahoo allowed comments on news stories, the comments were generally incredibly awful and sometimes hilarious in a bad way. Every story was filled with it.

arenn · March 10th, 2009, 05:55 PM

Blair Kamin moderates comments on his blog - it leads to mostly high quality discussion.

The Urban Politician · March 11th, 2009, 03:04 AM

^ I think that should be a standard held throughout the Tribune and Crains

bnk · March 11th, 2009, 05:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arenn

Blair Kamin moderates comments on his blog - it leads to mostly high quality discussion.

Thre are still a lot a assholes that post for the same reason that this post was created.

Thankfully BK can keep the stupid people at bay a bit but it is a never ending war of nimby's,GOP'ers, and anti Chicago peps that post in the comment sections of said articles that destroy the main point. [other than BNK's great work.]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blair_Kamin

March 6th, 2009, 03:32 PM	#1
The Urban Politician The City Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 5,967 Likes (Received): 0	Should the Tribune/Crains eliminate their comments section? Seemingly without exception, every single article is followed by a string of very angry commentary from people who clearly have an axe to grind. According to them, everything is Daley's fault, and we must blame the city and its leaders for any-and-everything. Instead of attracting constructive debate and civic discussion, the commentary section is being used by ticked off people to complain, complain, complain to no end. I'm not saying that accusing the city's leaders of wrongdoing doesn't have its place, but having read plenty of commentary sections I can say with confidence that we're seeing little else but that, and it makes one wonder if this is an experiment in internet journalism that should be continued. Thoughts? __________________ It is humanly impossible to walk through Chicago's core and not consider it one of the world's great cities unless you are inwardly angry at the place for somehow threatening or robbing your hometown of its vitality or integrity.

March 7th, 2009, 04:02 AM	#2
The Urban Politician The City Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 5,967 Likes (Received): 0	Not a single comment. Great! __________________ It is humanly impossible to walk through Chicago's core and not consider it one of the world's great cities unless you are inwardly angry at the place for somehow threatening or robbing your hometown of its vitality or integrity. Last edited by The Urban Politician; March 7th, 2009 at 04:13 AM.

March 10th, 2009, 05:55 PM	#12
arenn Registered User Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 2,589 Likes (Received): 10	Blair Kamin moderates comments on his blog - it leads to mostly high quality discussion. __________________ My Urban Affairs Blog: http://www.urbanophile.com/

March 11th, 2009, 03:04 AM	#13
The Urban Politician The City Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 5,967 Likes (Received): 0	^ I think that should be a standard held throughout the Tribune and Crains __________________ It is humanly impossible to walk through Chicago's core and not consider it one of the world's great cities unless you are inwardly angry at the place for somehow threatening or robbing your hometown of its vitality or integrity.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

March 7th, 2009, 04:20 AM	#3
chrome13 Registered User Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Chicago Posts: 234 Likes (Received): 0	They're useful to take a quick peek into the minds of the deranged, which can be fun. Besides that, they are worthless.

March 7th, 2009, 10:09 PM	#5
spyguy Expert Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Chicago Posts: 6,947 Likes (Received): 5	I think all newspaper forums suffer from this. It's just another form of voluntary response bias.

March 8th, 2009, 03:06 PM	#6
*Jan* High there, what's up! Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Rotterdam Posts: 14,432 Likes (Received): 493	Yeah, people armed not with facts, insights or even interpretations of those, but just with an opinion based on what they call 'common sense' or what I call 'general frustration' posting on news sites seems to be a universal problem. I skipped those toilet bowls years ago. The comments pages on the already quality poor Rotterdam Daily keep reinventing new rock bottoms when it comes to that.

March 9th, 2009, 11:22 PM	#8
Jibba Registered User Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 491 Likes (Received): 0	Every comment section I've ever seen has mindless venting and non-substantiated ranting. There are many reasons why this is that aren't worth getting into for the purposes of the question. For the publishers of online content, I think they feel the need to make their material feel as interactive as possible, for better or for worse. Occasionally, beneficial insight will arise out of the infinite string of crap, so there is that to be said (not much, I'll admit). At any rate, I think that the comments area functions to increase readership in one way or another; indeed, so long as the space for them is not intrusive and doesn't interfere with the overall readability of the piece they can't hurt. My personal opinion is that I would like to see them disappear so long as they continue to be a crushing reminder of how idiotic most people are. Quite entertaining most of the time, though.

March 10th, 2009, 12:33 AM	#9
Urbanight Registered User Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Chicago Posts: 319 Likes (Received): 0	The NYTimes allows comments on certain articles, and they usually frame the debate by giving readers a specific question. Maybe The Tribune should try that. Maybe they need more readers to produce more intelligent debates.

March 10th, 2009, 10:12 AM	#11
AJphx Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Phoenix Posts: 492 Likes (Received): 2	I remember back when Yahoo allowed comments on news stories, the comments were generally incredibly awful and sometimes hilarious in a bad way. Every story was filled with it.