The number of times the media gets things wrong, or distorts what is going on is
amazing. By eliminating or limiting comments, you miss hearing/reading the other
side of the story. It used to be you would get both sides of the
story from the media. That doesn't seem to be working.I don't mind
getting rid of the name calling trash, but the number of times comments that
don't match the version the News is trying create get deleted is too high.
The reason the ksl.com forums have been so uncivil, is BECAUSE of the voting
system!You've put a system in place that allows people to create
multiple (several a DAY!) user IDs to disturb the serious comments and to game
your voting system.If you disallow comments from free email accounts
(OR require that they be validated from a true ISP), you'll eliminate 95% of
your problems by identifying the miscreants. KSL created a system
that was too complicated and invited gaming of the system.
Good for KSL. While I appreciate thoughtful comments, many comments at the
Trib, KSL and elsewhere are horrible. Unlike a letter to the editor, people
hide behind a screen name and they spew invective, conspiracy theories and
rumors.I am glad to know that less than 1% of users make comments.
Maybe we can realize that most of our friends and neighbors don’t think
they way the worst commenters do, even if our neighbor’s politics,
religion or whatever is different from ours
It's a little disturbing to read between the lines and suspect that the Deseret
News gatekeepers may become even more restrictive about what they allow to be
posted in the comment forum when some editors are already capricious to the
extreme.I've seen comments posted to the forum that were wholly
inappropriate in their personal attacks and name-calling, while thoughtful
remarks on the same thread were barred because they had the audacity to critique
the Deseret News or the LDS Church.My greatest concern is that
Deseret News editors, in their attempts to create a more "civil" atmosphere in
the forum, will dumb-down the level of interaction by only allowing viewpoints
that agree with their own. Anyone with an opposing opinion or a viewpoint that
conservative LDS readers find "offensive" will get the Daily Universe treatment
-- they'll simply be banned. Why would a thoughtful, intelligent reader who
thinks for himself continue to visit such a Web site?Please consider
this before you make excessively draconian changes. I'm Des News and BYU through
and through; I'd hate to have to switch to The Salt Lake Tribune and begin
rooting for the Yewts.
Its simple:Allow comments to be immediately visible. That helps the
flow of conversation. Use moderators to scan and remove comments that are
irrelevant/spam/personal attacks/offensive. If moderators miss something, have
an "ignore user" feature. That way, trolls are quickly taken care of. They
will lose interest if no one is responding to them. Those who contribute will
be able to have dialogue with those who all wish to contribute. Those who are
respectful, no matter what their perspective is, will be allowed to enjoy the
boards and the efficiency of the board will be increased.Too many
times, I have had posts not put up for absolutely no reason. Its frustating. I
think the Dnews really can improve in this area by following my suggestions.
I agree with arc. The Des News never publishes comments that reflect poorly on
them or their reporters. Be willing to take criticism and improve upon that --
that is the whole point of comments from your readers.
I'm in favor of the idea of creating a more respectful atmosphere. Hate-filled
responses should be deleted.I am concerned about this: "Moderators also will remove comments that are irrelevant to the chosen
story."There is already far too much censorship on the boards and I
believe it is most likely the "off-topic" policy that is abused to remove
responses that moderators don't like for religious reasons.
I have to agree with arc. multiple times I posted a comment on stories about
the changes at the paper. I disagreed with the comments made by authorities at
the paper and my comments were not posted. The DesNews moderators need to
improve by allowing different points of view to be posted. Especially those who
If the poll system worked I would have voted. Since that is not the
case..... How often do you visit or post on the deseretnews.com
comment boards? Multiple times a day.How often do the
deseretnews.com comment boards provide additional information that you find to
be beneficial? All of the time. The deseretnews.com comment
boards are: Helpful and informative. I have
found information on the boards I normally would not have thought to
research. I find the open discussion of information helpful and
informative. The only thing I would add is that many get away with
terrible name-calling and violent and sickening comparisons on this board
They say that less than 1% of visitors read the message boards. But notice
SLTrib.com has been crashing all morning due to all the traffic that KSL sent
their way with this decision. I would say the KSL "Reporters" give
at best 40% of the information necessary to figure out what their article is
actually about. If you don't go into the comments the story rarely tells you
Who, What, When, Where, Why and especially How.
A filter to ignore selected bloggers would be nice.
Apparently they are blocking comments in here now as well. Closing
KSL's comments sent so much traffic t SLTrib tha tthe site crashed this morning.
The article states 1% of users view comments but how could that be true? KSL's
stories don't offer the Who, What, When, Where, Why or How on their stories so
if you aren't reading comments you aren't getting a story.
I'm to the point where I might stop reading Des News because my comments are
blocked for no good reason. Sounds like ksl is following the same path of
"Don't listen to the drive-by media. Only me!"Conservative guru and
talk-radio host to millions, Rush Limbaugh.
as a frequent reader of these boards (desnews, ksl, and sltrib), and commenter
about my specific keen interests, my opinion is the desnews comments are the
most civil, ksl comments the least civil (and I'm being civil). desnews
comments are the meekest, sltrib robust, challenging. just my opinion. and of
course I've never been the problem, I always tell me kids, my grandkids, and my
I agree with removing unnecessary hateful or racist comments. It does not help
at all. It looks to me that since the board comments were launched, hate and
rivalry are at their peaks. I don't see any good on reading comments from people
attacking illegals and the LDS church is such a way that it's hard to call it
civil. If people don't agree with the comments or the article, that's just fine.
But people attacking, that's just destructive.By the way, when
writing on newspaper, the article should just present the facts, not opinions
which are reserved for some other section of the newspaper. Therefore, being
against or pro some article shouldn't happen.
I love to read post to some of these comments!Im going to miss the jingle
:)mean while Im searching for a Full time Job. (maybe will be
I agree with Big_Ben's comments on having the comments immediately visible and
the ignore feature. Having the comments immediately available would greatly
increase the ability to discuss subjects of interest.I am all for
eliminating the hateful comments, so many of the comments posted are for the
purpose of criticising, finding fault or demeaning. I don't have a problem with
criticism that is associated with the article, if it is relevant, but too much
of the times (at least on the sites I frequent, sports articles)the comments are
just hateful because they hate BYU or the Church.
After an hour of waiting, my first comment has never shown up. I guess that
means that I can no longer post comments on KSL AND Deseret News. Hello Salt
Agree with removing abusive, offensive comments, but censorship should be kept
to a minimum.
I love to read the different oppinions and have often found myself thinking
about my stance after reading why people feel and believe as they do. Seems odd
to me that people would read comments on an article about something such as prop
8 and think that nobody is going to take a pot shot at their beliefs. There are
strong emotions on many topics and no comment board can stop those emotions from
showing. I don't know that it can be fixed, I'm going to miss reading opposing
The comments were the best part of these news websites. It's interesting to
read how people truthfully feel about issues. The American public is pretty
smart, they know when they are being conned. (Like those one-sided illegal
immigrant articles that want us to feel bad for a guy deported after getting 4
dui's, get real!!!! We know better.) By censoring it even more, I'll probably
just skip these sites and go to those that still allow free speech.
Then where will Utes and BYU fans be able to vent at each other? My
team's better than your team, nah nah nah nah nah nah.The sports
comments also provides great cover for those wanting to lash out at the LDS, and
vice versa.Hate is unbridled when spoken from anonymity.
I'm just ready to read comments without all the "hate". Share your thoughts and
opinions but please if the only way you can elevate your position is to tear
down another - then I believe that position needs a little more thought.
Let the comment boards police themselves. No censorship is needed or wanted. If
you come in to this room you can handle it. An ignore feature would be helpful
(although I am sure many would have me on their ignore list).
Sometimes thiers alot of spam of abusive rude comments its good =Good to ignore them or dont reply to insults)
some times a portion of rude abusive comments are read this must be
stopped//limited out! thanks News editoral board-news
I also agree 100% with Big_Ben and Solomon the Wise.We do not need
more comment moderation, what we need is the ability to ignore comments from
certain users. If you do that, comment moderation will take care of itself.
Things must be worse at KSL than I thought because their "journalistic
standards" are really low. However, their "editorialized" story reporting is
quite high. I will continue to make competitors to both the DesNews and KSL my
primary news sources because they're not afraid to tell the non-LDS viewpoint of
a story. Case in point, look at how channels 2, 4, and 13 reported on recent
layoffs at DNews compared to KSL.
Lets face it, the comments section in sports in regards to BYU/Utah has just
become an obnoxious schoolyard back and forth. It's annoying.Get
rid of it DNews.
Just eliminate the comments altogether. Then I could get more work done instead
of wading through the senseless rantings of the liars and haters while trying to
learn from others who have more information than may be in an article. Usually
the comments stray so far off topic I have to wonder what the gatekeeper at
DNews is thinking. Thanks for the ride.
(I tend to find it easy to dont Reply of read post never spam never not
Bite the Bait!)
KSL State of Utah Rules!!!!!!
I have the PERFECT IDEA HERE, shut down all posting comments, then watch your
rating's drop like a rock also. A true case of pre-re-election
censorship here, Deseret Digital Media announced that ksl dot com will
temporarily disable the news story comment boards on its website, and that
deseretnews.com will maintain its comment boards while improvements are made.
Meanwhile, the fully moderated comment boards at deseretnews.com will see
improvements including enhanced moderation standards that rule out comments that
contain personal attacks, violent or hate-filled remarks, epithets and racial
stereotypes. Moderators also will remove comments that are irrelevant to the
chosen story. Less than 1 percent of our visitors contribute and read comments,
said Chris Lee, general manager for deseretnews.
Have more Trivia something more fun on this OlBoard
Everybody knows these new policies and systems are designed for no other reaon
than to silence Vanka.No matter how you try to put blinders on
people, the light of truth always finds a way to sneek in. Your mindguarding
will fail and create backlash.
Sometimes moderators are too ridgid.I have spelled Obamas name in small letters
(out of disrespect) and it has been thrown out. Hateful and threatful words are
subject to a criminal offense if they are directed at the President. But to
disagree with him and not have it posted is way too one sided. Rude, hateful, or
disrespectful comments to any person,organization, or creed should not be
If you put any sort of "filter" on these comments, then it will be like
"censorship".Just remember that Utah is a state of USA --and not a
province of China.Let Freedom Ring!!!
How about allowing responses to individual comments that show up under the main
comment like the Trib does.I also like the ignore or hide user
Here is an extremely R & X rated comment for all of you--- BIG CRYBABIES! If you
cannot handle life in the fast lane than don't read it. Life goes on--- :oB
If they are going to be "including enhanced moderation standards that rule out
comments that contain personal attacks", how will liberals be heard once they
are backed into a corner?
I would like to be able to block or ignore selected authors of offensive
comments. It would be nice to have that option so that if someone posts
something that I think is hateful or unproductive then I don't have to read
anything from that author in the future.
I've had several criticisms of Deseret News not printed in the comments. They
printed a story of the deputy that was murdered in Arizona being laid to rest
the night before he actually was. I stated that if they hired back the 80 or so
folks they had fired that they may have done a better job of proof reading.
Never printed but the mistake was fixed as if it never happened. And since I've
brought it up again, my guess this one will get axed as well. I love talking to
Has nothing to do with China its about Decent Comments to what others post to
I comment regularly as firstamendment and JM. I feel that we
all should be involved in helping to elevate Utah, our neighbors, and the world,
not just professional journalists. There is so much information that can’t
be included in an article, and sometimes the comments are very informative,
although often buried by rants and etc. This is why the 2 comment rule is
good, but maybe the DN should allow more than 200 words.There was so much
misinformation and negativity in the comments that I ended up commenting simply
to combat that. I’m thankful that the DN allows all voices, but many of
these Screen Names are certain individuals with an agenda. They are often here
because they hate others and maybe have nothing uplifting to do with life, and
so want to bring others down. I don’t think a newspaper should be a format
for hate, and there is always the Trib (where they censor out comments and
people who disagree with their liberal or misleading agenda), anti-LDS sites,
and activist pages for those wishing to brush up on misinformation or etc. I'm glad all voices are allowed, but rants limited.
Although it is good to eliminate truly offensive comments it presents a
different problem when a well articulated differing opinion is seen as an attack
simply because it disagrees with an opposing point of view. If a person is
attacking an opponent's character rather than answering his argument then it can
be offensive, but if a person is presenting an opposing opinion with argument
based on the subject's merits....then it should be not viewed as an attack for
simply disagreeing with another person's view. Attacking an argument is
different that attacking a person. Unfortunately, there are many here who can't
seem to tell the difference including DN.
@dave4197 9:20 - I would hardly call the SLTrib's comment board "robust" or
"challenging." More like "disgusting."One example, I remember a few
years back when the Trib run a positive article about Frances Monson, wife of
Thomas S. Monson. The majority of the comments on the article were incredibly
ugly and filled with childish, hurtful language.To there credit,
several comments said things like, "I'm not LDS, but I wouldn't talk about my
worst enemy the way some of you have talked about Frances Monson." But these comments were rather the exception than the rule.@JoeBloeUtah 10:45 - Why is it people have their knickers in a twist because
out of the FOUR local news networks, ONE leans LDS? While of the THREE major
newspapers in Salt Lake (if you include the City Weekly) ONE leans LDS. Don't you support the "fairness doctrine?" And why do some
people think every local news story has to be LDS VERSE NON-LDS? Do local crime
stories always have an LDS side to them? What about stories like road
construction, school district issues and municipal government issues? Are these
ALL LDS vs. non-LDS issues?
How about one and done?How about one comment per article without
multiple screen names to hide the same persons identity?The DN
coment section is often dominated by multiple comments, on the same topic, by
the same people day after day.
My father was into marketing. This shows why this paper will fail. I hate seeing
any paper fail. The metric ju jour is the number of hits.You can
print intellectual Pablum and get viewership. It's too boring for most in the
information age. I go out of my way to avoid any LDS articles. I
know the format well. I like being challenged. One of the blessings of the gay
argument was it forced me to read the rabbinical view Sodom and Gomorrah. That
was a wonderful twist to a story I grew-up with. I saw that greed and
inhospitably were sins.My family is LDS. One reason, I avoid them is
because everything offends them. There's only one accepted worldview. This paper will be little more than cheer leading. The only people here will
be from one team. Your message won't go forth and influence others.
On a positive note. too many comments here from Mormons, make their
church seem filled with mean people of a single political mind set who sit in
judgment of others, who are arrogant and insular. This might be a truth you what
to keep from the world.
The last question in the poll should've had an "All of the above" option before
the "None of the Above" option. Then I would've selected that one. I'm for limiting the number of responses individuals can make to an article. I
think that certain people find a way to make criticism of the church, or
criticism of Obama, or criticism of conservatives, or criticism of topic du
jour, their little hobby and then beat a dead horse ad nauseum. Consistently I see the same people posting the same things often on articles
that aren't even tangentially related to the topic of the articles. Eliminating all comments would be a mistake, however. I've seen a lot of
contributions to stories, especially local stories, that enhance my ability to
understand and relate to a story.
I actually find some posts (even when I initially have formed an opinion on a
subject) every now and that are very informative and thoughtful and have caused
me to change my opinion.Media controls too much of the conversation.
Rank and file comments expand the view!
@UtahRef: I could not disagree more. There are hundreds if not
THOUSANDS of comments on this site that are critical of both the LDS Church and
the news outlets it owns. The evidence is right there for us all to
read; how could a "ref" could blow such an easy call. [wink]@Censorship screamers: Respectfully, your 1st Amendment complaints
are WAY off base here. Just as homeowners aren't compelled by law to
allow just anyone to put signs in our yards...Businesses such as KSL
and DN are not obligated to allow us to comment on sites THEY own and pay for.
That's not censorship, that's ownership. Sites do it
simply because it attracts visits, and they can show those numbers to
advertisers and charge more. Comments are simply a business
decision, not some right we have as Americans. You are totally free
to start your own blog and exercise your free speech there, and I bet Deseret
News and the LDS Church won't lift a finger to stop you. ;-)The wild
thing about all this is so many of those who are part of the problem see
everyone ELSE as the problem! :-(
Many times I have read comments that have provided invaluable information to me
about important issues. Unfortunately, some people use the comments
inappropriately, but they provide a valuable resource to those who can further
clarify an article. I am sad to see ksl eliminate them.
I have only just recently start to comment on stories that I read, and therefor
I have only just started to read the comments. It only took a short time to
learn some pseudonyms because they were always commenting, and it was always
negative and contentious. Now that I have read through these
comments, I see that they are the same ones on this thread calling it
censorship, and calling for no changes. Those that spit fire do not want their
outlet to be shut off.I think that if you want to make the comments
more civil, all you have to do is ban a few abusive people, and the board would
be clean in no time. And by the way, this would affect people on both sides of
the issues. There are mean people everywhere, but gratefully they are a
@ Democrat | 8:47 a.m. Sept. 16, 2010I simply wanted to single you
out as having written what I consider to be the most thoughtful and insightful
comment on the 1st page. In fact, that post was the best reason I
saw on the first page for keeping comments on articles. Your words,
and how respectful you were when you wrote them, are exactly what I wish was
after articles. If everyone shared their divergent views that way, I'd LOVE the
comments more than the news articles themselves. Unfortunately...Too few behaves as you do, so I'd rather comments just go away
altogether as a result. They are usually a distraction to the real
stories, not an enhancement. Judging by your screen name (Democrat),
odds are, you and I have some very different political views> However, I get a
feeling that you and I could have wonderful talks, and then grab our spouses and
go get ice cream after. I wish that more people here could get that.
We can disagree without being disagreeable.
I've read some of the "recommendations" from readers regarding what should be
allowed to be entered into comments boards, and I agree with most of it, but I
do not agree with barring under the terms: "conspiracy theories and rumors", and
this is why. For years, the idea of an "insider contribution to the the
distruction of the twin towers" was dismissed by the main stream media as
"conspiracy theory". Now that Imam Rauf wants to build a mosque in NY, and a
battle to support his perspective on things has become the "new political
effort", comments about "insider contribution to the twin towers" are actually
being aired on main stream media.So... one man's "conspiracy
theory", can become news at another point. Censorship in the media
can easily morph into a tool of the political machine for hiding a multitude of
lies.As long as a reader contributes his comments without name calling and
personal insults, I would encourage KSL and Deseret News to allow "free and
open" dialoge about almost all subjects and ideas. (It does amaze me how many
people can't manage to "agree to disagree".)
Thank you for doing this, KSL! I think all perspectives and opinions should be
able to be expressed, but without all the anger, resentment, hate, and
namecalling that currently goes on.yay! I would participate more if
the dialogue were civil
Interesting how some of those who are often the most negative and hateful are
complaining the loudest because they are only allowed to have 400 words instead
of all day long ; )I’m pretty sure the DN will still allow all
points of view, and anyone who reads comments regularly, as I do, knows that the
anti-LDS, the hateful, and other comments seem to dominate. Some people
may be here to increase hate for a religious minority, or to bury comments
expressing conservative opinions, opposition to gay marriage etc. I’m sure
you’ll still have the opportunity to express disagreement and even promote
misconceptions and hate, but you just won’t be able to bury the thoughtful
informative comments of others with ranting. 2 comments is enough for everyone,
even me. I’ve learned so much from responding to the
misinformation, and I’m glad the anti’s are allowed to post their
stuff here where LDS can actually respond and clarify, but when you do it all
day long it becomes a bit tedious, wading through all the already debunked
criticism to find real information.
Let's be honest, It's because BYU didn't get a BCS confernce invite and took a
beat down last week at AF - isn't it.The "powers that be" don't want
any negative "exposure".
As I have read the comments on many stories over the years... I have gotten the
feeling that many anti-LDS use these sites just so that they can trash the
church. I often have wondered if they get paid for how many comments they can
thrown into the mix.These newspapers are run by the LDS church. For people
to get on here for the sole purpose of trashing the church is like being invited
to someones home and trashing it, and them be alright with it.I have
noticed also that many reporters print onesided articles, especially dealing
recently with the illeagal immagrants. Even me who is active LDS get tired of
the continues sobs stories and one sidedness of the stories. We state our REAL
concerns about this problem and they just get brushed aside as if they don't
exist. I think if both sides were related more often then people would not be so
upset about these storiesI am all for cleaning out the trash. I feel that
if I as an LDS member cannot come to a newspaper owed by the LDS church and not
feel comfortable.. then there is a problem somewhere.
I get the sense many of the D News moderators let their personal biases affect
their censorship. For example, there was an article on Alex Smith last week.
In the comments section one poster proceeded to ridicule Max Hall by calling him
Maxie. My simple response was to state that I am a big fan of "Alexis Smith."
My comment was censored. Why would my comment be censored as opposed to the
other comments about Max Hall? Personal bias? This is why so many readers are
frustrated with the moderators here.
I think the two comments per day rule would work reallly well. No more 20-30
post per day by people like JM.
Thank you,Msybe the name calling can go away and lead to a civil
discourse.Two-post max seems a bit extreme. Like any town hall
discussion, sometimes a few extra posts need to be made for clarities sake. I
see no prolem with a discussion, as long at it is civil.Otherwise, I
like it. I like it.And shepherds we shall be,for
thee my lord for thee.Power hath decended forth from thy handso our
feet may swiftly carry out thy command.And we shall flow a river forth to
theeand teeming with souls shall it ever be.Agus beimid inr
n-aoirar do shonsa, a Thiarna, ar do shonsa,t cumhacht tagtha anuas
do lmhionas go gcomhlonadh r gcosa do thoil go tapaidh.Sruthimid ar
aghaidh mar abhainn chugatAgus pldaithe le hanamacha a bheidh s go deo.
As JM and JanSan have admitted, these new policies are intended for no other
purpose than censorship. They are a continuation of the LDS Church's attempts
to keep their people in "the bubble" by mindguarding and controlling their
access to "non-faith-promoting" views.Such efforts are antithetical
to the idea of a "publication". When you are in the business of "publishing" to
the "public", but you want to limit and control what the public can see, you are
not a newspaper, you are a propaganda tool.As these new policies
reflect the attitude of the new management, we have good reason to suspect the
integrity of most everything "published" by Deseret Media. A deliberate act to
silence dissenting views does not reflect well on this organization or its
Having a comment board where you need to learn to disagree without being
disagreeable is a valuable public service. I hope that it never reaches the
point however where we discards comments just because they represent a different
point of view.
The problem is that too many comments come from people who haven't read the
articles and don't have constructive insights. They merely want to spew their
opinions or emotions about a subject.The delay between submitting a
post and seeing it is frustrating and results in too many people posting the
same thing over again. Especially since the websites server is poor and it is
hard to know whether your comment was really submitted or not.I
agree with whoever said there should be no derogatory nicknames allowed like YBU
Yewts etc. I wish people wanted to discuss topics with willingness
to listen to the other side. Not enough civil and thoughtful people or at least
they go silent while others voice their opinions uncivilly.
Wait a minute, are we still living in the United States of America?
It's just more censorship and I believe it will only chase off more readers.
It's as if they want only the good LDS members and those with little or no
opinions. I've preferred the DNews but certainly will go elsewhere for my local
news because it this. Wonder why your readership is dropping? It escalated when
you required registering before posting comments. Go back and check the
records. If the reader is offended by healthy and feisty comments they need not
read, but don't resort to censorship and expect us all to agree with everything
you write or the newspapers' take on the story. You're taking a hugh step
backwards. Half the reason I read your paper is for the feedback and the balance
it brought, now that's gone or going away, so am I.RON (oops, caps) nasty
thing in you opinion!
The phrase "Pot calling the kettle black" came to mind when reading JM's and
JanSan's comments above. The speakers disparage the subject for a fault or
negative behavior that could equally be applied to him or her. People can't
expect others to refrain from criticizing a subject, belief, or view that
opposes theirs even if it is the LDS Church. Is the Church so above criticism
that some people think it shouldn't be criticized at all? Calling people
anti-LDS and accusing people of promoting misconceptions and hate, and having an
agenda to trash the Church is an attack on people in general and does not
address the actual problem of civil behavior in any beneficial way. DN is in a
public domain by being online and as such LDS people shouldn't expect or demand
that the Church NOT be criticized. Yes, it should be done in a civil way, but to
not permit it it at all makes for a one-sided view.
Well looks like the changes didn't stop hedgies comments from being posted, that
really would have been a great day for all of us.
to; ClarkHippo | 12:01 p.m. Sept. 16, 2010 You wrote "@dave4197
9:20 - I would hardly call the SLTrib's comment board "robust" or "challenging."
More like "disgusting."thank you, I'll got there! sounds like it's
healthy and they aren't interested in the readers always agreeing with them!I agree this is the beginning of the end for the DNews, you can't csnsor
without killing yourself!
Who knew that JM was from Lehi, Utah? I didn't, but now I do. This is a cool
I've always loved the rivalry of BYU and Utah, that's gone, we all have to
love one (or) another. talk about censorship at it's worst.. hope this kills the
paper so the next one (trib) can learn from it.
from what I'm reading it doesn;t sound like the readers want this comment
board shut down or censored. who in the world has the DNews been listening to?
if it ain't broke, don't fix it! you are making a mistake!
Only getting two comments per person per story? No thanks. It's been
enjoyable discussing issues on these boards. There are many thoughtful
commentors on this site (both those I agree with and have disagreed with). I
have definatelly had some good arguments that keep my on my toes. Well it seems like it is over, fun while it lasted. But only being
able to have two comments? No, you can't have a conversation that way. D-News, you might gain more readers this way, though I seriously doubt it, but
I have a feeling the level of dialogue at this site will go straight down the
toilet. Obviously you guys at the D-news don't want rich dialogue
and conversation, though, do you? You just want people to say what they think
about what you wrote. You want to totally control the conversation.
Well I never read the D-news before I found these comment boards. For local news
I read only The Trib and City Weekly. But I liked these boards there
were people here that had different opinions then me that were, at times, very
insightful. I also found people that had different religious
opinions then me, and it was fun to have conversations with LDS people. But only being able to have two comments to a story? I mean
look at that I've already used my two, if someone responds to me I can't say
anything back now. No, I won't do it. Redshirt, the
"truth" (I still think you need to rethink your handle :-) ), question,
Richards, and all of the conservatives I've argued with, thank you! It's was fun
while it lasted, but this site wants to shut the dialogue down. Well
it doesn't surprise me, since Cannon took over, conservatives seem to want to
shut down people talking. ;-) Pagan, LDS liberal, all you others,
keep up the good work! Maybe I'll see all you guys over at the Trib,
we'll keep the conversation going there.
This is so elementary.But hedgehog is correct.It's all
Utah fans' fault.Utah fans have had too much fun at the expense of D
Harmon and BYU since June.It's AFA's fault for winning last Saturday game.
I don't post here because my comments are always deemed 'inappropriate'. My
comments have always conformed to the required criteria so I'm not sure why this
happens. Maybe things have changed here. We'll see.
Conservatives to blame Obama for these changes in 3... 2... 1...
Stating an opposing point of view, and using tact and civility are two different
things. I have stopped reading most of the sports posts because of this very
issue. Somewhere along the line we got it in our heads that we should belittle,
berate, and argue instead of offering viewpoints. Viewpoints are always subject
to disagreement, but please be civil about it.
This is not improvement.I don't like it
Well, since I only get two comments per story, I'll go ahead and say it
again.How are we supposed to have a discussion when we only get two
comments?At this point now, if someone replies to my post, and there
is a misunderstanding, I have no way to go back and re-explain what I was trying
to say.I just want to know if I can implement the two-comment policy
with my wife?"I'm sorry sweetheart, but you have already made your
two comments. I'm sure the kids need dinner, and I would feed them, but that was
in your third comment, and therefore, it is not valid".Can I do it
with my boss?"I agree that we need to be sensitive to those needs,
however, that was in your third comment."And the 911 operator:"I would love to give you the address of the fire, but I have already
given you two comments". "I would love to give you race and
gender... but you have height and weight..."Lose the two comment
restriction.If someone is being stupid, you can just have the
moderator not post the inane posts....
Could this "change" be construed as social engineering?
I love talking to myself, looking into a mirror, because I'm right all the time,
and am proud of it. So right now, I will try to have a civil dialogue, among DN
Moderator's and its readers. I don't think that none of us are in elementary
school any longet, so we don't need a "time out", or even a "hall monator pass
or a potty pass" while we are in a conversation mode, and the DN LDS Church
conservatives seem to want to shut down people talking their own views on a
story, their way, in their own word's and what sparked off their feeling's about
it. There's always 2 sides of a coin as well. We know that. But, what side are
you on DN, is the question?. That's what I want too know. It doesn't sound like
the readers want this comment board shut down or censored, who in the world has
the DNews been listening to?. In Congress and on a State, County and City
level, they to take on a "JUST DO IT" theme, without asking the people first.
That's just wrong.
Comments and dialog is half the reason I read KSL.com and deseretnews.com. I've
read some very interesting things after some of the stories. Some insightful,
others are pure bunk. I'm intelligent enough to see the difference between the
two. I liked that KSL allowed me to vote on the comment. I had no problems
with the way that they were presented on KSL. If there are no comments, I may
reduce or eliminate KSL as one of my news sources. I don't want just one point
Article besides religion and BYU vs Utah arent bad, I think. But those two
subjects, I get upset because there is no rational information, just people
bickering and calling names. But I enjoy reading the high school sports comments
because students or teachers at the school usually know more about it then the
writers because they are so close. But the moderators need to do better at
eliminating name calling and the like. Its when somebody calls other people
something that everyone else gets mad and the arguing goes on and on for like
I enjoy conversations with people in everyday life and I enjoy comments to
stories. At the same time, in everyday life, if someone contributes
nothing to the conversation but constant criticism, and dare I say hatred, with
no actual point or basis for the comment then I choose not to listen to or
associate with them.Please give us, as individuals, the same ability
here to permanently block the comments of those that we find offensive as we
have in real life. Perhaps then comments will become meaningful from those
committed only to mockery (as already seen above by certain trolls).
I'd hate to have comments disabled. I also think that the poll the Des. news is
running is not at all representative of the whole picture. I was forced to
choose one answer, but in most cases, I thought all of them (or multiple) were
true. Do i find the boards to be juvenile? Mostly. Do I find them funny? Yup. Do
I find them hateful? that, too. Do I find them informative? I can't tell you how
many times the writers have corrected their story b/c of astute readers, esp. w/
sports. So, what's the problem with all of the above? Isn't this a forum for
free, mostly civil (ok, perhaps not mostly) speech? Do they want to facilitate
that or get rid of it?
DSN censors most comments that are considered 'liberal'. Note to readers:
there are a lot of liberals out there you don't know about thanks to the DSN.
Maybe the Dnews (and it's owners) should tell us specifically how to respond.
Better yet, respond for us.If you want to save even a shred of
creditabilty let the forums be free or shut them down.
Hello everyone. I just want to say goodbye to DN and all commenters. It has been
nice reading you, but i like a little privacy. I am heading over to the Tribune
from now on.Have a great life knowing everyone's business ;-]
Thank you Vanka for the kind words that you pointed out to me..Thank you
for the individual judgement you made on me..For your information, I do
not work for DN therefore what I write is nothing more then my oponion.. Nothing
that you can blame on DN "have admitted these new policies are intended for no
other purpose then censorship"Thank you for telling all those on the
comment boards that I live in a bubble created by the church and cannot think
for myself.. just because I don't see things the way you do!Thank you for
telling me that my oponion of not liking the anti LDS comments and the rudeness
of some people about our beliefs makes me a person of invisable worth.THANK YOU.... so much for proving my words!
The only way to improve the tone of these forums is to 1. Require full names
and addresses be posted on every submission. Names must be verified somehow via
email. 1. Better moderation before posting. People hide behind
anonymity. It's sad. I guess people truly don't understand the hatred and
intolerance which they spew really only hurts themselves. If you could get that
to happen....you'd make some progress. Good luck and thanks.
DN - Please do me one small personal favor....Since you insist on
limiting us to only 2 commentsPlease do not post anymore letters from, Mr. Frank Overfelt.As this will most surely cause the most severe
anxiety, and quite possibly go ruin my day.Thanks.
@mark: it's not Cannon it's Willes. Oh that's right, you get your news from the
SLLIB and City Weekly. It's your Leftwing leaders who want to bring back the
Fairness Doctrine...conservatives want to shut down people talking??? oh, was
that a joke? okay, I'll start laughing now...I just sent the Dnews
an email detailing why I won't be around with a 2 comment limit and the many
other suggestions for improvement on these boards. The fact that the
posts go through the censors and never in a timely fashion completely detracts
from any dialogue that could be had.No need to come to the Dnews for
any information now....I'm still waiting for LDS LIberal and
UtahblueDevil to bring their principles to the table on the "do-gooders"
article. I understand why you are silent on the issue and it's because you can't
justify stealing from one to give to another with the gospel.You
believe in forcing people to do what you consider good so you can feel
better.Christ doesn't agree with you...
This is easy, and someone mentioned it earlier. Take away comments on religion
section and sports section. Civil dialogue on either went away a LONG time ago.
Or, really anything BYU/Utah and to some extent Utah State. That's
really where it's become infantile as some posters in this thread showed
earlier. This isn't about censorship everyone, this is about not
providing a forum for people to hide behind a screenname and hap-hazardly
throwing out insults about universities or religion. You are not being
censored. As a matter of fact, I'm reasonably certain this wouldn't have come
up if people couldn't police themselves and simply conduct themselves as adults.
The discussions especially in regards to BYU/Utah on both sides of
the fence has literally made grown adults sound like children for years and
years. I'm glad the DNews is looking into it, and since the fans can't police
themselves and have a reasonable amount of respect for each other, I say take it
away from the children.
Without providing a feedback area, it's much easier for slanted articles to
influence public opinion. Is the fear over illegal immigration? Is
this the hot button issue that has brought this forward? It really
is better to give people an outlet to their frustrations. That should also be
taken into consideration.
I appreciate comments that are insightful, ON TOPIC, and best of all
respectfully humerous. I don’t like to hear about personal
religious prejudices, be they Mormon, Moslem, Catholic or Evangelical, or
wing-nut politics, (either extreme wing, left or right), or those “illegal
aliens.” I’d like to see accountability of commenters
with only verified accounts with ONE screen name and total lifetime scores for
the quality of comments. Too low, and you would eventually get dropped and not
invited back for awhile.Accountability not anonymous
irresponsibility.Ebay does it, why not KSL / Des News?
I've also had problems with brief innocuous comments being blocked for no
discernible reason. I suspect it was due more to a faulty computer program than
a thin-skinned DNews moderator, but when I've written to the DNews staff about
the problem, I've never gotten a response. So who knows?I think the
comment boards should be moderated to eliminate the sicker and more hateful
comments, but on the whole, the boards serve a great purpose and I'd be sorry to
see them go.
It would be good if KSL and Deseret News (and all media) reported the news,
which is what journalism was, rather than 'editorialize' the news. Now we hear
'talking heads' say "we will tell you what it means". The arrogance of the
media is out of control. Taking down the comment boards is an attempt to
silence alternative opinion. The mood in this country is anti-government and
anti-media because of the elitist attitude.
Conceptually, this all sounds reasonable but I'm afraid the "devil is in the
details". As with so many things, getting the specifics of how things will work
out often leads to the problems many have voiced here. I've had very civil and
thoughtful comments censored for who knows what reason. These are judgment
calls and we don't all judge the same which is, after all, the point of comment
boards. Certainly what seems clearly offensive to me may not be to you. I'm
suspicious those monitoring will be far more conservative than necessary. For
me it comes down to what is at the root of most changes taking place at the DN
and KSL. They can publish and broadcast whatever they see fit but don't call it
"news" when it's clearly becoming a scripted, "on message" tool for a private
organization. Please read the code of ethics for the Society of Prof.
Journalists, then let's talk.
This site is successful because of the community of users that discuss the
issues. As with any online community some policing of behavior and content is
needed but if you want to continue to succeed you need to facilitate, not
hinder, conversation. Here are some suggestions. 1. There's no
reason to restrict the number of comments a person makes on a story. On your
most popular stories, discussion evolves. Those engaged in the discussion need
more than two comments. Some people do try to bury opposing viewpoints with
redundant, off-topic, derogatory, illegible, oddly-spaced, etc. comments. These
behaviors are the problem. You should be creating and enforcing policies that
deal with the bad behaviors instead of limiting your most passionate readers
ability to engage.I also wanted to write about a few more things.
Unfortunately, I'm nearly out of words and this is my second post. It's
unfortunate that you don't consider my opinion valuable enough to give me
sufficient space to talk about: 2. the dampering effect of your slow
moderation3. ways the community can self police and report problems (not
just thumb up/down)4. technicalbugs in your system5. somuchmore
The timing is highly suspect. But I believe it's more the management style of
Mr. Mark Willes. You can google him, and find this is his management style. The Internet has brought us a wealth of information, that makes it
practically impossible for the media to control. It's given us a much better
educated view of current events. It would be a shame for these two
media sources not to take advantage of it, through open comment sections. Give us the news, let us decide how we feel about it.
Strange. KSL had the most active media boards in the area, and reading them was
strictly limited by choice. If given the choice between a site with
or without comments, I will choose the one with comments. There is some good
information out there. Sometimes you have to read through some different ideas,
but then what's different is subjective, isn't it?This is the 21st
century. Expressing one's opinion is all part of the Internet.
Hallelujah! I am happy to see DN seeking out a better way for
communication in this this era of expanding social media communication. I look
forward to the growth of this new community dialogue tool.1. Great
Rule about using real identity. In the old days of Letters to the Editor, I
always used my real name. This made me think way more than twice about what I
was writing and how I was expressing myself. This move restores authorship
accountability/responsibility. One problem though is we live in a
crazy world and not everyone is nice out there. But - if we want our opinion to
count for something - just like a journalist does, I think we have to be willing
to follow the standard of "our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor". 2. We're no longer in the one-sided era of "Letters to the Editor".
Social Media is instant messaging and dialogue. I do not believe we should limit
speech (by number of posts or words), but by using the tools of today (Social
Media communication), dialogue on DN will become the reliable and civil source
for exchange, information and pulse of our worldwide community.
My suggestion...get some censure police that are not Right wingers, so that
posts can be read. A VERY LARGE part of the posts from the Left never get heard
because the editors deam they shouldn't be seen. If you support the
LDS church ...your posts always go thru...Somehow...it's how we
expect the news to be...biased.
here is what the tribune will allow: sltrib says: we do have rules
and we will remove posts that violate them, but we take a much more liberal
approach. We don't pre-moderate anything and we rely on the community to set the
tone. If you see something you think we should look at, hit Report Abuse. That
does not automatically remove it, but simply sends it to a place we regularly
monitor. We check every reported post individually and in context before making
a determination. We tend to err on the side of open dialogue rather than
removing every little thing that technically violates our guidelines. It's more
about the spirit and tone of the discussion than the hard and fast rule. It's
pretty simple, really. Be cordial, even in disagreement, don't get baited into
petty arguments, try to stick to the topic as it relates to the article, don't
attack anyone personally or call anyone names and don't use inappropriate
language. If you can stick to that, you'll have a long and happy stay here.
SoIAmTryingToMakeEachWordCount.I guess my point is that no matter
what the rules are people will find a way around them. If I hit my 2 post per
thread limit I will just create new accounts to post from.My
suggestion is that instead of registering to post a comment D-News should
require a credit card and a pseudonym. From the card number you could create a
user account that is accurate and can't have more than one. This type of user
validation has been used other places to verify users and locations. The users
name, address, and date of birth could be saved as part of the users profile,
and if they tried to use another card for another account it would be detected.
The persons pseudonym and location would be the only thing displayed.That insures one user one voice. Then it is easy to ban people that
consistently violate your rules. It wouldn't be easy to create another account
just to get passed your rules.
Its obvious to me that the DeseretNews is still under the control of the LDS
Church by some defacto standard. If the DesNews new comments section
standards continues to slant and deny comments that are deemed non-faith
promoting or anti BYU then I will permanently ban your site from my large LAN.
You will lose several hundreds hits a day. Be it from only one unique IP
address. But nonetheless it will be blocked.The Salt Lake Tribune
continues to be Utah's sole paper of choice and true opinion and public
comment.Sadly this last week's layoffs at the Dnews will probably
not be the last.Goodbye DesNews.com! You've acheived what you wanted
by blocking your negative or other insightful commentary. Hope you are happy
now.I am now that I see your true intentions.
I like being able to read several comments at the bottom of a screen and think
that not having the last several comments available for immediate viewing may be
a change for the worse. Often the comments are quite informative and can
generate thought beyond what the original article could. I agree with many
opinions above that state that sometimes insightful comments seem to be deleted
that are not offensive, but simply differ from what the newspaper may be trying
I see that DN has already started including the city of the commenter. I think
that is an improvement. If someone is out of state I appreciate knowing it.It is a fine line between "moderating" and censorship. Let's hope that
the moderators understand where that line is, and are capable of removing their
bias and that of the DesNews editorial staff from the moderating process.
I have enjoyed the comment board since I have been reading the DN online and
have read and left comments. I like the name with the location to see the
diversity of those that read the DN online. I have corresponded with
readers that I would love to meet in person both those that I have agreed with
and those that I have disagreed with as well.This does make the world a
smaller place.These changes will limit comments by all and allow us
to do others things with our lives other than run and check the comment board on
a regular basis to see whom has responded with what.
I think the low numbers of posters may be a reflection of lower numbers of
readers. I hope it is not a sign of unwillingness of young folks to express
their opinions in writing.I think sometime posters, myself included,
get a bit excessive in their criticisms, particularly of politicians....but
politicans make it so easy eh?The lively banter between posters on a
hot news item is what I enjoy.It is usually quite obvious when a DN
editor posts, regardless of their attempts to hide it. On the one hand it is
like the saying about a reporter making themselves part of the news, but then
again a valid alternate point of view is okay, however it should be balanced and
not just a reflection of the DN editor's political leanings.As long
as folks don't get nasty and personal we all should be able to take it if we
dish it out!
DN- please help us all understand why posting a S-I-N-G-L-E word in all caps for
emphasis triggers the rule against "excessive capital letters?