Not all of our ideas work. A good example of this is our struggles with the online commenting system.
Both the News-Press and Leader used, until very recently, an automatic system. That is, if you registered, any comment you posted would show up immediately. This, I felt, was the best way to encourage people to engage with the paper online.
The alternative – requiring each post to be reviewed before showing up online – seemed to me a chill on free speech. Additionally, it's fairly difficult for people to respond to one another if it takes hours, or longer, for a comment to show up.
Perhaps you see where this is going. In addition to spam and advertisements for Viagra weakly disguised as legitimate remarks, we had numerous hateful, bigoted and racists comments.
The automatic system does account for this, by the way. The larger community is supposed to police itself, flagging such comments as inappropriate. This, in turn, alerts us to a problem, giving us the ability to deal with it appropriately. Additionally, if a comment receives two or more flags, that comment is automatically removed.
This, by the way, is how the Los Angeles Times deals with comments on its website. It is also a prime example of when it is best to part ways with our corporate sibling. The Times has many, many times more readers than we do, and has many more people commenting on its stories.
We simply don't have the online traffic, as yet, to allow for this. Here's my view: the more hateful and bigoted comments on our site, the less likely people with something constructive to say will do so. Left unchecked, the comments on the site will be made up of people virtually shouting at one another.