Search Maine Yellow Pages 
Log In | Register | Help

Joe Michaud: On the Green Line
Joe Michaud, president of MaineToday.com, talks about the ever-changing site and the state of online media. (more on the Green Line...)

Blog Index
September 17, 2007
Any thoughts on that?

Wow. Bill Nemitz wrote a column on Thursday about people who post Reader Comments under pseudonyms "Cowards find courage at the keyboard." Predictably, it hit the fan. There are over 200 comments on the column as of this writing.

Since the topic of handling public submissions online is a lively topic around the newspaper industry, not just here in Maine, I sent a link around to a couple of industry email lists, and over 40 people on those lists sent replies with their thoughts or questions.

Rather than address them individually, I put together the following email, which also might address some questions you have about Reader Comments.

Here's the email:

****

A number of people have weighed in with questions or comments following my post about one of our newspaper columnists taking anonymous commenters to task.
I hope this background and perspective is useful:

- Why do we have Reader Comments on all stories? Because since 1995 our operating philosophy has been to use the Web to expand the traditional role of our company beyond journalism but within our core values as a community resource. At the outset, some "user generated content" consisted of literally handwritten submissions and photo prints. Remember Koz.com, circa 1997-99? We were early adopters, and late bailers. Today we consider that all submitted comments, photos, articles, events -- and ads -- are a unified spectrum of Mainers' involvement in our sites. No doubt in another five years, it will look more different still.

- To be very clear, this is not journalism, nor does it flow from our mission as a journalism organization. It flows from our broader mission as a community resource. In other words, we're not doing Reader Comments because everyone else is. And stopping is not an option.

- A person must register before being able to submit anything: comments, photos, an ad, whatever. They need to provide an email address, and the registration doesn't happen until they respond to an email sent to that address.

- All submitted content, including Reader Comments, is reviewed by the MaineToday.com producers. At the moment, the newsrooms of our three papers are not involved. During this review, the standard is for rejection, not acceptance. In other words, the assumption is that almost everything goes up, with exceptions noted in our policy. (We understand that this is not true moderation.) Some content goes live immediately and reviewed later, some is reviewed before going live. So far, we estimate that less than 5 percent of comments are rejected. Based on what I've heard around the industry, we may be lucky.

- Most Reader Comments are reviewed before going live, which means that comments posted after-hours won't go live until the next morning. We have an informal process where after someone posts 25 comments and none is rejected, their comments might be enabled go live immediately. Those comments are reviewed afterward. If one of these "Regulars" violates policy, he/she gets kicked back to ordinary status.

- Contrary to many in our industry, I do not believe reader contributions can be managed simply by putting better technology in the hands of the users. Human beings need to be involved behind the scenes on an ongoing basis. Some could be committed volunteers, but some must be on staff. I also don't believe we could ever guarantee "real" identities without visiting people's houses or requiring a credit card.

- Our philosophy on Reader Comments is summarized by this metaphor: we are dropping a microphone into the conversations of the community and relaying what people are saying. Is most of it useful or worthwhile? Sometimes people post useful factual information that advances a story. But much of the feedback we receive about Reader Comments is that people enjoy seeing what other people think. If that's their standard, who are we to decide what's useful?

- Yes, the columnist violated our company's policy of protecting users' identities. I don't want to say it's understandable, but it happened because of a combination of chance and lack of awareness of the policy. We'll try hard to prevent it from happening again.

- Where this is heading: we are looking at a more unified platform for all user submissions, whether comments, photos, etc. tied into a user's profile page. We believe the "profile page" will be a powerful force, when a person's postings all appear on one page. We hope to include aspects like rankings and possibly various levels of exposure that the user can choose to view comments, or not. Plus offering different ways to view them, like reverse order, or not.

I realize there are strong opinions out there contrary to the opinions offered above. This is a work in progress, no one has it figured out yet, so we intend to keep moving and changing.
*****
That's what I wrote, and I expect the industry list will light up again.
More importantly, let's hear more from you:

Posted by Joe Michaud at 06:05 PM
Bookmark and share this entry: digg del.icio.us Reddit
Comments

Thanks Joe, for pointing out what many alleged: that Mr. Nemitz did indeed violate policy. Can you expand on the "combination of chance and lack of awareness"? This seems to rhyme strongly with 'our editors dropped the ball because we've always trusted Bill'?

Posted by Relayer
September 18, 2007 06:59 AM

I would like to see an apology from Bill Nemitz.

Posted by Jill
September 18, 2007 12:10 PM

Any takers that Bill doesn't even address this in another editoral? My bet is he avoids this and the "coward" doesn't admit when he dropped the ball.

Posted by Dan
September 18, 2007 03:57 PM

I have always found Nemitz to be insightful and in tune with the majority of Maine people. The fact that he made an error is understandable and acceptable as long as it is addressed, and it has been here and now

I do think Nemitz should personally address the issue, but can see no outcome but 300 posts of bickering and infighting, so I personally am satisfied with his "Boss" addressing the issue

Nemitz wrote one interesting and hard hitting column regarding the "invasion" of Border Patrol Agents and the impact on the Immigrant population a couple years ago, reported to us on a personal note from Iraq and often takes less than popular stances to provide us with human interest

I would truly miss the column wrote by Nemitz and hope people realize his errors are far less than the many we commit each day in the inane and childish comments in the readers section, but of course he is held to a higher standard even though he is human

The fighting on the readers section, be it Collins/Allen, Ocean/Olympia or Nimitz is good/bad can be clearly defined with political boundaries, not true philosophical differences that are not set in political ideals

Posted by Tom
September 18, 2007 11:15 PM

It's good to hear the PPH's stated policy on comments. That said, maybe you could rethink the part of the policy that puts the comments on the same page as the story. Mixing the two blurs the boundary between reporting and opinion. Other papers have a link to a comments page, and this helps keep the separation between the two.

I also think that some common sense moderation is in order. My opinion, for what it's worth.

Finally, I really had to dig to find this page, Joe. The layout of the PPH/MST is straightforward, but it's almost impossible to find anything in the Mainetoday part of the site.

Thank you for keeping an open mind on this issue.

Posted by Paul
September 19, 2007 06:49 AM

For the record, zillions of posts and not once has one critized, name called,or defamed, another poster,private citizen or a victim in a story.

Posted by Reader Portland-Boston,ME
September 19, 2007 07:32 AM

Hi Joe! Now that this is settled, could you do something about the Daily Headlines e-mail? Every day it arrives with no headlines in it, just ads. This never happened when *I* was sending it.

Posted by Pat Washburn
September 21, 2007 07:28 AM

The fact that Nemitz violated your company's policy ought to be published in the newspaper where the column originally appeared. It is not enough to address it only in this blog, which reaches a fraction of Nemitz' audience.

To be fair, Nemitz did not expose anyone, however, the company's rules, which state that on occasion a reporter may contact a poster via email, surely were not meant to include the kind of contact Nemitz attempted. His intention was never to seek information from posters, but rather, to ridicule them in his column.

Indeed, one wonders if he would have been disappointed had someone actually responded. He needed deadends so he could call people cowards and harumph, harumph, harumph.

Posted by
September 24, 2007 09:13 AM

The fact that Nemitz violated your company's policy ought to be published in the newspaper where the column originally appeared. It is not enough to address it only in this blog, which reaches a fraction of Nemitz' audience.

To be fair, Nemitz did not expose anyone, however, the company's rules, which state that on occasion a reporter may contact a poster via email, surely were not meant to include the kind of contact Nemitz attempted. His intention was never to seek information from posters, but rather, to ridicule them in his column.

Indeed, one wonders if he would have been disappointed had someone actually responded. He needed deadends so he could call people cowards and harumph, harumph, harumph.

Posted by Delores Haze
September 24, 2007 09:15 AM

Post a comment









Remember personal info?







Please enter the code as seen in the image above:



Blog Index


Bookmark and share this entry:
digg del.icio.us Reddit
Updates
Sign up to be notified when there's a new entry
RSS
Subscribe
Archives
By date


Add to Technorati Favorites