Anonymous online commenter sued for libel (updated)

playthrough · Apr 26, 2012

Re: Anonymous online commenter sued for libel

I say the same thing with every comments discussion -- charge 10 cents a pop and you'll solve a lot of problems. The lunatics won't want to be bothered, and those who still want to comment will PAY YOU MONEY. So there's an online revenue source for ya, dammit (yeah, maybe it's just dimes but so are some of your ads).

People who still write letters to the editor and mail 'em are paying postage. Different but they're still paying something.

I don't care about the conversation. That's what Twitter/FB is for. But on stories on a paper's website? That's the storefront. If you want a voice there, pay me.

Evil ... Thy name is Orville Redenbacher!! · Apr 27, 2012

Re: Anonymous online commenter sued for libel

armageddon said:

SF_Express said:

Whatever ... and I say that with a great deal of thought.

I've never particularly understood the vitriol here toward user comments and engagement, and why anybody would root for the paper to get sued too is beyond me.

Part of the evolution of media, and I think it bugs some (not all who don't like them, just some) that it's a two-way conversation now.
Click to expand...

SF: I don't mind the two-way street. I was engaging readers on the web long before we had comment sections, blogs. What pisses off the reader who makes a bullshit comment or flames or just says crap that is wrong is when you correct them (no matter how politely) or remove their comment.

Their standard response is: How dare you censor my comments? You have no right to do so. :
Click to expand...

To add...
The most vociferous of the commenters are the hardcore nutjobs; folks with an axe to grind on the issue, a person involved or the writer.
I have no problem engaging readers and commenters. But some are irrational.
No matter how many times you explain yourself or the story - and sometimes the facts - they refuse to accept it. And when you stop trying, they gloat how they were right because you gave up. They shout you down. And it further empowers them.

You can't argue with crazy.

I also think the hardcores run off the normal commenters, what few are out there.

TheSportsPredictor · Apr 27, 2012

Re: Anonymous online commenter sued for libel

Stop charging people to read articles and start charging them to post.

Problems solved.

SF_Express · Apr 27, 2012

Re: Anonymous online commenter sued for libel

TheSportsPredictor said:

Stop charging people to read articles and start charging them to post.

Problems solved.
Click to expand...

Eureka!

Ace · Apr 27, 2012

Re: Anonymous online commenter sued for libel

playthrough said:

I say the same thing with every comments discussion -- charge 10 cents a pop and you'll solve a lot of problems. The lunatics won't want to be bothered, and those who still want to comment will PAY YOU MONEY. So there's an online revenue source for ya, dammit (yeah, maybe it's just dimes but so are some of your ads).

People who still write letters to the editor and mail 'em are paying postage. Different but they're still paying something.

I don't care about the conversation. That's what Twitter/FB is for. But on stories on a paper's website? That's the storefront. If you want a voice there, pay me.
Click to expand...

I like the way you think.

I Should Coco · Apr 27, 2012

Re: Anonymous online commenter sued for libel

TheSportsPredictor said:

Stop charging people to read articles and start charging them to post.

Problems solved.
Click to expand...

I've mentioned this to our online guru (a nice guy, but NOT a journalist), and he's said, "No way, if we start charging for or shutting out comments, our web site traffic would go to shit." Less traffic, less online ads, less revenue, etc ...

Which made me think, the whole future of my shop's operation lies with nutjobs hiding behind anonymous screen names bashing away at each other at 5 a.m. each day.

That's soooo encouraging ...

geddymurphy · Apr 27, 2012

Re: Anonymous online commenter sued for libel

So ... none of the anonymous commenters here see the irony in lamenting anonymous comments? No one?

That said, I love this idea ...

TheSportsPredictor said:

Stop charging people to read articles and start charging them to post.

Problems solved.
Click to expand...

Brilliant.

The guy who complained about it is way off. Commenters are a small fraction of your readership. The most-commented stories often aren't the most-read. The most-read stories are either the best or the most bizarre. The most-commented mention Obama somehow.

LongTimeListener · Apr 27, 2012

Re: Anonymous online commenter sued for libel

geddymurphy said:

So ... none of the anonymous commenters here see the irony in lamenting anonymous comments? No one?
Click to expand...

I believe any libelous comment that has appeared here should get the commenter sued, yes. Same as my outlook on newspapers or any other media outlet.

bpoindexter · Apr 28, 2012

Re: Anonymous online commenter sued for libel

Evil ... Thy name is Orville Redenbacher!! said:

armageddon said:

SF_Express said:

Whatever ... and I say that with a great deal of thought.

I've never particularly understood the vitriol here toward user comments and engagement, and why anybody would root for the paper to get sued too is beyond me.

Part of the evolution of media, and I think it bugs some (not all who don't like them, just some) that it's a two-way conversation now.
Click to expand...

SF: I don't mind the two-way street. I was engaging readers on the web long before we had comment sections, blogs. What pisses off the reader who makes a bullshit comment or flames or just says crap that is wrong is when you correct them (no matter how politely) or remove their comment.

Their standard response is: How dare you censor my comments? You have no right to do so. :
Click to expand...

To add...
The most vociferous of the commenters are the hardcore nutjobs; folks with an axe to grind on the issue, a person involved or the writer.
I have no problem engaging readers and commenters. But some are irrational.
No matter how many times you explain yourself or the story - and sometimes the facts - they refuse to accept it. And when you stop trying, they gloat how they were right because you gave up. They shout you down. And it further empowers them.

You can't argue with crazy.

I also think the hardcores run off the normal commenters, what few are out there.
Click to expand...

Sort of like on SportsJournalists.com. ... Sorry, couldn't resist.

Pilot · Apr 28, 2012

Re: Anonymous online commenter sued for libel

I don't like how the article about the law suit leads with something about the first amendment. That doesn't do anything to help the perception among many of these dumbasses that they have a constitutional right to post whatever they want on a newspaper's web site.

dixiehack · Apr 28, 2012

Re: Anonymous online commenter sued for libel

If Web comments are what keep the lights on at my local paper, then let it fold. Because regardless of story topic every comments section reads like a transcript from a Klan rally.

Raiders · Apr 28, 2012

Re: Anonymous online commenter sued for libel

There is a certain value to knowing what the nutjobs are nutjobbing about. It does tend to wreak havoc on the forum, but I like the opportunity to look in that window.

And newspapers will do anything for page clicks now, won't they?

Log in or Sign up

Anonymous online commenter sued for libel (updated)

playthrough Moderator Staff Member

Evil ... Thy name is Orville Redenbacher!! Well-Known Member

TheSportsPredictor Well-Known Member

SF_Express Active Member

Ace Well-Known Member

I Should Coco Well-Known Member

geddymurphy Member

LongTimeListener Well-Known Member

bpoindexter Active Member

Pilot Well-Known Member

dixiehack Well-Known Member

Raiders Guest

Share This Page

Members

Useful Searches