Show Me Progress:: Reason 184 For Not Commenting At Media Blogs

Thanks for your opinion (0.00 / 0)

Thanks for making comments available here. I'm sorry to hear that you think the solution is to squelch discussion, rather than participate in it on our site.

Most of the comments on STLtoday are quite interesting. Without question, there are some that are distasteful. On this particular story, we deleted a number of comments that we thought were outside the bounds. We have also closed discussion on that story, and moved the debate to our blog, A Conversation about Race (http://www.stltoday.com/race).

Our view is that it is better to entertain the discussion and, hard as it is, give light to attitudes such as this. I would rather know it's there and be able to address it than pretend it doesn't exist.

The Political Fix is moderated just like our other stories -- after the fact. We also make it clear that we welcome and encourage input from readers if they see something that violates our guidelines.

I hope you'll take as sincere our desire to maintain a candid, but safe place for discussion -- and participate.

-- Kurt Greenbaum, St. Louis Post-Dispatch

by: kgreenbaum @ Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 12:28:30 PM CDT

I hope so (0.00 / 0)

And I do believe that you're sincere in wanting to maintain it as a place for serious discussion. I don't think that the solution is to squelch discussion, as you put it, but rather to make clear that certain speech is outside the bounds of reasonable discussion.

I wrote the post at 10 this morning, and some of those comments had been up for hours, leading me to believe there was no moderator, or that the moderator was very lenient.

by: Clark @ Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 12:39:39 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Lots of comments (0.00 / 0)

I would not be surprised if a comment was there for awhile. We get hundreds of comments on our stories and we simply cannot read them all. Blog are a bit of a different story. As you know, as a blogger, you get alerted when there's a new comment on a blog item. Typically, the volume of comments is more manageable. That's why we ask for, expect, encourage readers to help us with the story comments.

by: kgreenbaum @ Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 13:14:22 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Uh, we still have to check and read them (0.00 / 0)

...As you know, as a blogger, you get alerted when there's a new comment on a blog item. Typically, the volume of comments is more manageable...

Are you saying that it's just too darn difficult, or that you don't have the resources? There are solutions to the problem - and there are people with plenty of experience who can give you advice on how to fix it.

543,895 votes

by: Michael Bersin @ Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 13:19:45 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Resources (0.00 / 0)

I'm saying we don't have the resources to devote to reviewing every single comment that's posted. By the way, very few large news organizations do review every comment.

Additionally, as I said earlier, most of the comments on the site are just fine. I read many, many stories on our site in which the comments are cogent and interesting. We try to pay special attention to the ones that we suspect may be problematic.

I think it's fair to ask for readers to help. Many of very happy to do so. We get a lot of "abuse reports," and we have a system in place to respond to them.

by: kgreenbaum @ Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 13:27:28 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Then don't have comments (3.00 / 2)

The same crap goes on at places like the State Journal-Register's site--regular homophobic, racist, sexist, and just downright obnoxious comments. It's unclear what discussion you are having. Your site runs forums that are populated by loons who long ago drove off anyone reasonable. Look at Current Affairs or Sylvester's forum--that's not discussion--it's a bunch of morons screaming at each other--notice Sylvester pretty much stopped going into the forum.

---Most of the comments on STLtoday are quite interesting.

No, they aren't. The closest thing they resemble are the call ins to Town Talk where cranks call in and complain.

You let this crap fester:

http://www.stltoday.com/stltod...
===Confusion is the norm in East Spade Louis. The place is crawling with orangutans in city hall and chimps in the ghettos.

by: archpundit @ Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 14:21:32 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

No (0.00 / 0)

No, they aren't. The closest thing they resemble are the call ins to Town Talk where cranks call in and complain.

This comment is baseless. You haven't bothered to spend much time reading comments, then. As I said, there are some that are troublesome. They are mostly crime stories; we try to watch them closely. Readers are happy to help us police them, apparently, because we get plenty of abuse reports -- and we respond to them.

You let this crap fester...

Thank you for pointing it out! It would have been gone sooner if you'd reported it through our built-in 'report abuse' channel rather than throwing slings and arrows on another blog!

by: kgreenbaum @ Sat Apr 11, 2009 at 08:39:26 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Wrong (0.00 / 0)

I read comments at Stltoday every day and I'm greeted by that kind of garbage every day. Go look at these two:

http://blogsaintlouis.com/2009...

Those aren't atypical and the same people continue to post this garbage every day. You have created a forum for racists and you apparently think reasonable dialogue is going on there. It isn't--it's a bunch of lunatics yelling at each other. Congratulations. That's quite a body of work you have created there.

You are right, Town Talk is an unfair comparison. Town Talk has some reasonable moderation.

I've seen Stltoday go from being a place that used to have at least a couple decent forums with discussions to a place of vitriol and racist, homophobic, and sexist abuse. That's not what I want when I go to read the news. I don't need racist jackasses adding commentary to news.

The real question is why do the paper's editors continue to allow this to occur.

by: archpundit @ Sat Apr 11, 2009 at 19:04:12 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

There is discussion, and then there are conversation enders (3.00 / 1)

And some things do not merit debate or discussion. Racism, sexism, etc. Since I just celebrated Passover last night. Let me do the whole Jewish Mother thing and relate a little anecdote. I believe it was Elie Wiesel, but I can not locate the source, so I qualify it with an "I believe it was"...

Some years ago a talk radio host wanted to have a debate between Mr. Wiesel and a holocaust denier who had recently published a book denying the genocide of 6 million European Jews. Mr. Wiesel (iirc) graciously declined, saying one can not "debate" mental illness.

There are meritorious arguments, which merit discussion. Then there are meritricious arguments, which do not.

by: --Blue Girl @ Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 13:16:04 PM CDT

Agree to disagree? (0.00 / 0)

I agree with Mr. Wiesel about mental illness. But that's not what we're talking about here. The attitudes exist; why deny that? Why not get it out in the open and discuss it? I would commend to your attention this recent column from the Washington Post. I thought it was fascinating: http://is.gd/rOjZ

by: kgreenbaum @ Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 13:30:40 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Perhaps (3.00 / 1)

But in St. Louis as in other places around America, I think it's relatively easy to encounter racism without having to "expose" it by letting racists run rampant in response to an article that had nothing to do with race.

Obviously, you are free to run the website in whichever way you wish. I wrote the post to let people know why I don't frequently comment on media websites - it's because all too often, I run into discussions like the nasty one I described rather than the enlightening ones you mentioned.

by: Clark @ Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 13:46:01 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

No. I don't agree to disagree (3.00 / 1)

Comments like this are over the damned line and you have a responsibility to moderate them:

This doesn't surprise me at all. Libs take every opportunity they can to shove miscegnation in our faces. Now that TV has to show blacks in every commercial, notice that they are always posed beside a blonde woman. Not a brunette, a blonde. Its done for shock value. Sickening that a once proud newspaper would resort ot this. Joe Pulitzer is turning over in his grave in shame.

.....

Well the wonderful PD will be out of business in no time using putrid photos like this. The sooner the better and good riddance.

.....

If that girl lost some weight,she could probably find a white boyfriend, assuming anyone would still be interested. Highly unlikely but possible.

I would be most interested in analyzing the tortured reasoning that would go into justifying/rationalizing/defending those comments. I don't need to eat a turdburger to know I wouldn't like the taste. And I don't need to have racist garbage shoved in my face to know that those people are out there, and I want nothing to do with them.

by: --Blue Girl @ Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 20:33:49 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You have chosen or been sent to defend the indefensible (3.00 / 2)

The comments repeated here and indeed, a large number of the comments that I read at STLToday do not belong in any discussion that's being held among adults. I wouldn't visit a bar, restaurant, church group, neighbor, school group or any other gathering where people talked like that. That's why less and less of my information comes from the Post Dispatch or its website.

Further, as a child and through my whole adult life I have been taught/told that we have an obligation to object to racist and cruel talk. Clark and the good people who read this site are absolutely right to reject the trash in your comments.

Finally, I think STLToday staffers ignore this problem at their own peril. This thread of discussion (disgust at STLToday comments) is becoming more widespread and will lead to more readers turning their back on the Post.

by: St. Louis Liberal @ Sat Apr 11, 2009 at 08:37:43 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

My point exactly (0.00 / 0)

Further, as a child and through my whole adult life I have been taught/told that we have an obligation to object to racist and cruel talk.

That's exactly my point. I do not believe that obligation is best served by ignoring such talk or criticizing us for trying to create a forum to debate it.

by: kgreenbaum @ Sat Apr 11, 2009 at 09:00:35 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

soooo (0.00 / 0)

why do you provide a forum that is trafficked in by far worse stuff than what I find on the Council of Conservative Citizens blog?

Seriously--they don't get regular traffic--you do, and yours has far more examples by quantity of racism.

Why do you let it fester?

by: archpundit @ Sat Apr 11, 2009 at 19:08:18 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Perhaps you're right (0.00 / 0)

I agree that it is apparently useless to debate this with you here. There are people on our Conversation about Race blog who are debating, pushing back on the people who have these attitudes. Those of you here, who purport to be progressive, are apparently more content to kill the messenger.

I'm sorry you disagree with me. I believe it is very difficult, but important, to engage people rather than to dismiss them.

The comments that were excerpted in the original blog post above were not the worst of them; those were deleted as quickly as we could. The ones above are difficult to read. They were left because we made a decision: If we were going to have honest debate, we would have to allow people to express attitudes that made some of us uncomfortable. Racist ideas, we said, would have to be aired if we were to get an honest airing of opinions. Racist language and name-calling, we decided, would not be tolerated -- and we try to catch it and deal with it as fast as we can.

It is troubling to think those attitudes exist. Yet they do.

You are the people who could challenge these attitudes, who could bring intelligence and experience and facts and statistics and reason to the discussion.

But you would rather criticize me and the Post-Dispatch.

by: kgreenbaum @ Sat Apr 11, 2009 at 08:54:06 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

So now you're the victim? (0.00 / 0)

We only exist here in this form because old media in general has failed so miserably. Nature does abhor a vacuum. And you criticize us for not doing what should be your paper's work for you? Wow.

543,895 votes

by: Michael Bersin @ Sat Apr 11, 2009 at 09:08:12 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

No, I want to read the newspaper without a heavy helping of racism thrown in (0.00 / 0)

You've created a cesspool--not a place for discussion.

I want to read an article on East Saint Louis without someone bringing up apes. Is that too much to ask for?

You keep trying to pretend it's some isolated incident. It most certainly is not. It's a common pattern of vitriol and hatred that the Post-Dispatch inexplicably provides a forum for.

by: archpundit @ Sat Apr 11, 2009 at 19:06:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Reason 184 For Not Commenting At Media Blogs

by: Clark

Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 10:25:09 AM CDT