CBSNews.com turns off comments on Obama stories
Cory Bergman May 5th, 2007
CBSNews.com is turning off comment functionality on existing and upcoming stories on presidential candidate Barack Obama. “It’s very simple,” said Mike Sims, director of news and operations for CBSNews.com. “We have our Rules of Engagement. They prohibit personal attacks, especially racist attacks. Stories about Obama have been problematic, and we won’t tolerate it.” While CBSNews.com deletes objectionable comments after they’re posted, Sims said the “volume and persistence” of the racist comments made it difficult to keep up. “We’d like to be able to return to them, and I’m not ruling that out,” said Sims. “But at this point it’s not possible.” (Thanks James for the tip!)
Also, Howard Kurtz on WashingtonPost.com notes that his site is experiencing “a surge in offensive and incendiary comments.” Like CBSNews.com, WashingtonPost.com does not pre-screen comments before posting them — they receive some 2,000 a day and delete offensive comments when they’re alerted to them — but executive editor Jim Brady says he plans to devote more staff to the monitoring process and use new filtering technology. “The medium allows for readers and journalists to engage in conversation, and to say we’re not going to take advantage of that doesn’t make a lot of sense to me,” he says. “I’d rather figure out a way to do it better than not to do it at all.”
Adds Saundra in comments: “In and era of shrinking resources, what newsroom wants to devote full-time eyeballs to police the nut-jobs that persist in trying to spoil the comments area with offensive posts. I know you guys love the dialogue, but this is a real problem. I would much rather use my limited manpower to uncover real news rather than babysit the comments section of my website.”
17 Comments Add your own
1. saundra | May 6th, 2007 at 4:53 am
In and era of shrinking resources, what newsroom wants to devote full-time eyeballs to police the nut-jobs that persist in trying to spoil the comments area with offensive posts. I know you guys love the dialogue, but this is a real problem. I would much rather use my limited manpower to uncover real news rather than babysit the comments section of my website.
2. Tim | May 6th, 2007 at 7:03 am
I kind of agree with saundra - if you have to spend too much time filtering the posts, it isn’t a conversation anymore it’s moderated comments.
Perhaps the following policy, if posted on the site, would help:
“We reserve the right to remove any posts from our site which are deliberately offensive and which do not contribue to the conversation we are trying to have with our customers. When someone consistenly posts these offensive posts just to be disruptive, we will if possible ban them from the comments section _and_ post their name and location on a list for all to read.”
The prospect of losing their anonymity might slow some of these folks down. It is, of course, hard to track some of them down especially if their ISP doesn’t cooperate, but doing it for just one or two would give pause to the others.
It’s either that or requiire some kind of user verification before allowing them to post.
3. Anonymous | May 6th, 2007 at 5:53 pm
What’s sad here, of course, is the fact that CBS has to ban comments because the quantity of racism is too high to manage. No wonder Obama is getting Secret Service protection. His wife must be worried sick. So depressing.
4. discreet_chaos | May 6th, 2007 at 6:06 pm
I don’t know how many LRs noticed, but Yahoo! “temporarily” did away with their “Discuss” feature because each and every post resulted in an avalanche of racism and homophobic comments.
Occasionally, I’d click to say something, but it was just too much for “normal” people to wade through. I mean, I’m all for freedom of speech, but in response to a news article about Bill & Melinda Gates, you wouldn’t expect to find 2,000 posts filled with vulgarities and only about a dozen that related to the article.
And, while I’m at it: I remember on MLK’s birthday, I clicked around YouTube to find a good copy of his “I Have a Dream” speech. The best one and the one that I wanted to link from my old blog had nothing but racist trash spewing down its “discuss” feature.
I remember because I spent about an hour on MLK’s birthday morning, doing nothing but hitting the “report” button and wondering if Google were to delete all of the offending comments, what those that answered might look like alone.
5. Rex | May 6th, 2007 at 7:59 pm
Heh. Up next: “Lost Remote turns off comments on Obama stories”
6. fleetwood mack | May 7th, 2007 at 5:49 am
the aptly named chaos45i demonstrates for us all why some blogs are finding the need to turn comments off.
what about a blogworld in which we were all forced to use real names to get onto the boards
7. Steve | May 7th, 2007 at 7:20 am
You might look at the comments model used by Plastic.com. You can comment as an “Anonymous Idiot” but those who register have the ability to filter all AI comments out as they choose.
8. Steve Safran | May 7th, 2007 at 9:28 am
I removed the rant Rex and fleetwood refer to because it was defamatory and entirely off topic. LR is not a forum for airing political screeds. It is, of course, a forum for discussion on “Are You Smarter Than a Fifth Grader?” and “Who Wants a Joost Invite That May or May Not Work?”
I’m a middle-of-the-roader on this one. I don’t like to have to register to post. Besides, it’s simple enough to fake an identity, so what’s the point? If things get too incendiary, turning off the comments seems perfectly reasonable.
We don’t take down posts because of opinions we don’t agree with. We don’t take down posts that call us names. We take down posts with offensive language, except in rare instances (such as when a swear is the topic of an FCC debate and is thus the matter of discussion).
We wish we could censor Rex, but you try and stop him.
I absolutely believe people should post under their real names. But you can’t force anyone to do so. The only exception is when someone is giving you an inside tip that could cost their job or pose a threat to their safety or the safety of someone else.
I choose to pay little attention to people who won’t stand behind their own words.
It’s common sense. Have a great conversation. Accept opinions different from your own. If it gets so far out of hand that it’s violently offensive, disgusting, or racist - simply shut it down.
9. News Consumer | May 7th, 2007 at 4:14 pm
To quote Churchhill,
“A fanatic is one who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject.”
10. Steve Ginsberg | May 8th, 2007 at 8:43 am
I couldn’t disagree with Saundra more. The web has shifted from a one directional medium similar to newspapers to an actual dialogue with readers. Journalists should come down from their ivory towers and actually listen to what people are saying in order to report news that relevant to their readers. I don’t condone the idiots who use comments as a platform for hate speech, but turning off the feedback mechanism filters out the 98% of people who actually have something to contribute.
11. Spencer_fg | June 11th, 2007 at 7:22 am
Merhaba!
Check this out!
*
12. Spencer_fg | June 11th, 2007 at 7:23 am
Merhaba!
Check this out!
*
13. Alice_ij | June 11th, 2007 at 7:23 am
And some more..
*
14. Alice_ij | June 11th, 2007 at 7:23 am
And some more..
*
15. Frank_gl | June 11th, 2007 at 7:24 am
At last…
*
16. Frank_gl | June 11th, 2007 at 7:24 am
At last…
*
17. Rmeoses | January 14th, 2008 at 6:38 am
No but cbs can sure talk their tash about Hillary.
and coward down now .im boycotting cbs period.
now whoes being racest ?and trying to stop the American people for making a comment on the proper issues and for speaking out .print that cbs.
Leave a Comment
(Please keep URLs out of the comment body or the spam filter will block you.)Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed