If online publications wanted genuine discourse under articles then I'm sure the die-hard commentators would pay a fee to engage in such, especially if the auth

If online publications wanted genuine discourse under articles then I'm sure the die-hard commentators would pay a fee to engage in such, especially if the author were around to offer response. Seems this would provide enough of a barrier to stop _most_ "trolling", and self fund the moderation. If newspapers would stop using clickbait titles I'm sure they'd move the needle somewhat too. They are however in the 'eyeball' game and the content quality reflects this lowest common denominator ethos.