3 ms·
The mystery to me is why sites like the Washington Post have a comments section at all. Think of the time and money they spent implementing and running it, poss
by skuhn 10y ago
The mystery to me is why sites like the Washington Post have a comments section at all. Think of the time and money they spent implementing and running it, possibly requiring the most technical effort out of their entire publishing endeavor.
All to get tons of horrible garbage dumped at the bottom of their pages every minute of the day.
Tons of high traffic sites have these wild west zones at the bottom of their otherwise tightly controlled articles. They have next to no oversight, there are barely any technical barriers to prevent abuse, and yet they still command a significant portion of the main content's reach.
This is absolutely not lost on people who want to promote certain views loudly, quickly and cheaply. I really doubt that all (or even most) of the comments on a site like the Washington Post's are actual people who actually think those things.
But somebody does, and some people will start to find those views more acceptable when they see them everywhere at once.
- revelation 10y agoI figure for most of them it came with their CMS anyway or it was sold as "just add this piece of JS" to increase engagement by some 3rd party. People sign up with their mail in a fit of "someones wrong on the internet" and you can effortlessly spam them. Having a comment section feels right on the internet, particularly for sites that religiously avoid using any sort of links, at all.
- ceejayoz 10y agoNPR ditched comments this year for the very reasons you cite.
- skuhn 10y agoNice. Now to uncomment the rest of the Internet!