Deseret Digital Media announces changes to comment boards at,

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • TripleCrown Santa Ana, CA
    Sept. 21, 2010 5:41 p.m.

    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?

  • Hurryin' Hoosier Lawrenceburg, IN
    Sept. 17, 2010 7:28 p.m.

    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!

  • Alberta Reader Magrath, Alberta
    Sept. 17, 2010 5:53 p.m.

    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.

  • Brer Rabbit Spanish Fork, UT
    Sept. 17, 2010 12:45 p.m.

    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.

  • conservative scientist Lindon, UT
    Sept. 17, 2010 10:34 a.m.

    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 to promote.

  • TheCanuck Salt Lake City, Utah
    Sept. 17, 2010 10:27 a.m.

    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! 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.

  • mkSdd3 Ogden, UT
    Sept. 17, 2010 10:00 a.m.

    IHopeYouCanAllUnderstandThisPost IOnlyHaveSoManyWords 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.

  • Outraged Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 17, 2010 9:55 a.m.

    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.

  • dalep2u Herriman, UT
    Sept. 17, 2010 9:23 a.m.

    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...'s how we expect the news to be...biased.

  • Mary E Petty Sandy, UT
    Sept. 17, 2010 7:51 a.m.


    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.

    Sept. 17, 2010 4:56 a.m.

    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.

  • SLars Provo, UT
    Sept. 17, 2010 12:35 a.m.

    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.

  • ex missionary Sandy, UT
    Sept. 17, 2010 12:04 a.m.

    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 moderation
    3. ways the community can self police and report problems (not just thumb up/down)
    4. technicalbugs in your system
    5. somuchmore

  • souptwins Lindon, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 11:53 p.m.

    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.

  • Woodyff Mapleton, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 10:35 p.m.

    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.

  • shamrock Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 9:09 p.m.

    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.

  • American Citizen Morgan, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 9:03 p.m.

    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?

  • RichardB Murray, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 8:54 p.m.

    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.

  • jazzbball Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 8:20 p.m.

    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.

  • @Charles Draper, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 7:43 p.m.

    @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...

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 6:45 p.m.

    DN - Please do me one small personal favor....

    Since you insist on limiting us to only 2 comments
    Please 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.


  • Freedom Huntsville, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 6:36 p.m.

    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'd make some progress.

    Good luck and thanks.

  • JanSan Pocatello, ID
    Sept. 16, 2010 6:08 p.m.

    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!

  • zinnia Holladay, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 6:06 p.m.

    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 ;-]

  • hedgehog Ann Arbor, MI
    Sept. 16, 2010 6:02 p.m.

    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.

  • Bebyebe Ogden, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 5:19 p.m.

    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.

  • staypuffinpc Provo, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 5:11 p.m.

    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?

  • TheSpiker Alpine, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 5:08 p.m.

    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).

  • dhsalum Saint George, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 4:53 p.m.

    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 150 posts.

  • CKS007 Clearfield, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 4:53 p.m.

    Comments and dialog is half the reason I read and 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 of view.

  • Brother Chuck Schroeder Saint Petersburg, FL
    Sept. 16, 2010 4:46 p.m.

    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.

  • Peace Mammoth Lakes, CA
    Sept. 16, 2010 4:39 p.m.

    Could this "change" be construed as social engineering?

  • Veritas Aequitas Fruit Heights, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 4:22 p.m.

    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....

  • SoCalJazzFan San Diego, CA
    Sept. 16, 2010 4:20 p.m.

    This is not improvement.
    I don't like it

  • Andermart Orem, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 4:19 p.m.

    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.

  • Schwa South Jordan, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 4:18 p.m.

    Conservatives to blame Obama for these changes in 3... 2... 1...

  • tll Ogden, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 4:16 p.m.

    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.

  • Mid-Major Cougars San Diego, CA
    Sept. 16, 2010 4:07 p.m.

    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.

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 3:27 p.m.

    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.

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 3:08 p.m.

    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.

  • Expert (in training) Syracuse, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 2:59 p.m.

    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!

  • DC Fan Syracuse, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 2:56 p.m.

    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.

  • I Bleed Blue (Boise Blue) Bonners Ferry, ID
    Sept. 16, 2010 2:49 p.m.

    Who knew that JM was from Lehi, Utah? I didn't, but now I do. This is a cool feature.

  • Opinion mine Layton, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 2:43 p.m.

    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!

  • yankee doodle Layton, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 2:41 p.m.

    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.

  • Joggle Clearfield, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 2:39 p.m.

    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.

  • the-buzz Layton, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 2:32 p.m.

    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!

  • SoCalUtahFan Irvine, CA
    Sept. 16, 2010 2:30 p.m.

    Wait a minute, are we still living in the United States of America?

  • Kyle loves BYU/Jazz Provo, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 2:04 p.m.

    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.

  • Henry Drummond San Jose, CA
    Sept. 16, 2010 2:03 p.m.

    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.

  • Vanka Okemos, MI
    Sept. 16, 2010 1:52 p.m.

    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 leadership.

  • Veritas Aequitas Fruit Heights, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 1:46 p.m.

    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 hand
    so our feet may swiftly carry out thy command.
    And we shall flow a river forth to thee
    and teeming with souls shall it ever be.

    Agus beimid inr n-aoir
    ar do shonsa, a Thiarna, ar do shonsa,
    t cumhacht tagtha anuas do lmh
    ionas go gcomhlonadh r gcosa do thoil go tapaidh.
    Sruthimid ar aghaidh mar abhainn chugat
    Agus pldaithe le hanamacha a bheidh s go deo.

  • Pickle Juice, The Key to a BCS Fruit Heights, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 1:39 p.m.

    I think the two comments per day rule would work reallly well. No more 20-30 post per day by people like JM.

  • Hallsy Lehi, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 1:38 p.m.

    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.

  • JanSan Pocatello, ID
    Sept. 16, 2010 1:32 p.m.

    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 stories
    I 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.

  • hedgehog Ann Arbor, MI
    Sept. 16, 2010 1:29 p.m.

    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".

  • JM Lehi, UT
    Sept. 16, 2010 1:28 p.m.

    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.

  • livestrong
    Sept. 16, 2010 1:15 p.m.

    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

  • S.R.
    Sept. 16, 2010 12:53 p.m.

    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".)

  • Tlingit
    Sept. 16, 2010 12:41 p.m.

    @ Democrat | 8:47 a.m. Sept. 16, 2010

    I 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.


    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.

  • mkSdd3
    Sept. 16, 2010 12:37 p.m.

    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 minority.

  • chris8484
    Sept. 16, 2010 12:26 p.m.

    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.

  • Basketballogy
    Sept. 16, 2010 12:21 p.m.

    @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! :-(

  • USAlover
    Sept. 16, 2010 12:17 p.m.

    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!

  • raybies
    Sept. 16, 2010 12:14 p.m.

    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.

  • Not_Scared
    Sept. 16, 2010 12:08 p.m.

    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.

    Sept. 16, 2010 12:02 p.m.

    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.

  • ClarkHippo
    Sept. 16, 2010 12:01 p.m.

    @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?

  • Joggle
    Sept. 16, 2010 11:58 a.m.

    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.

  • JM
    Sept. 16, 2010 11:54 a.m.

    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.

  • maidenwings
    Sept. 16, 2010 11:44 a.m.

    Has nothing to do with China its about Decent Comments to what others post to one another,duhhh

  • Poppa Al
    Sept. 16, 2010 11:42 a.m.

    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 myself.

  • JoeM
    Sept. 16, 2010 11:42 a.m.

    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.

  • RedShirt
    Sept. 16, 2010 11:39 a.m.

    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?

  • daizy
    Sept. 16, 2010 11:35 a.m.

    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

  • Ravenal
    Sept. 16, 2010 11:31 a.m.

    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 option.

  • Cougars --Best Little Brothers
    Sept. 16, 2010 11:25 a.m.

    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!!!

  • LKA
    Sept. 16, 2010 11:20 a.m.

    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 allowed..

  • Vanka
    Sept. 16, 2010 11:12 a.m.

    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.

  • lifeOnEarth
    Sept. 16, 2010 11:11 a.m.

    Have more Trivia something more fun on this OlBoard

  • Brother Chuck Schroeder
    Sept. 16, 2010 11:09 a.m.

    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 will maintain its comment boards while improvements are made. Meanwhile, the fully moderated comment boards at 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.

  • Cinnamon
    Sept. 16, 2010 11:02 a.m.

    KSL State of Utah Rules!!!!!!

  • LuVePacifica
    Sept. 16, 2010 10:59 a.m.

    (I tend to find it easy to dont Reply
    of read post never spam never not Bite the Bait!)

  • Whoa Nellie
    Sept. 16, 2010 10:58 a.m.

    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.

  • jazzbball
    Sept. 16, 2010 10:54 a.m.

    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.

  • JoeBloeUtah
    Sept. 16, 2010 10:45 a.m.

    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.

  • Jimmy James
    Sept. 16, 2010 10:42 a.m.

    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.

  • LuVePacifica
    Sept. 16, 2010 10:31 a.m.

    some times a portion of
    rude abusive comments are read this must be stopped//limited out!

    thanks News editoral board-news

  • LuVePacifica
    Sept. 16, 2010 10:26 a.m.

    Sometimes thiers alot of spam
    of abusive rude comments its good =
    Good to ignore them or dont reply to insults)

  • Thomas Jefferson
    Sept. 16, 2010 10:23 a.m.

    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).

  • dj2
    Sept. 16, 2010 10:19 a.m.

    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.

  • SpanishImmersed
    Sept. 16, 2010 10:16 a.m.

    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.

  • BoomerJeff
    Sept. 16, 2010 10:15 a.m.

    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.

  • oldmanbball
    Sept. 16, 2010 10:14 a.m.

    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 views.

  • Truthseeker
    Sept. 16, 2010 10:03 a.m.

    Agree with removing abusive, offensive comments, but censorship should be kept to a minimum.

  • Bazinga
    Sept. 16, 2010 9:54 a.m.

    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 Lake Trib.

  • Captain L
    Sept. 16, 2010 9:54 a.m.

    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.

  • LuVePacifica
    Sept. 16, 2010 9:46 a.m.

    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 back soon)

  • mecr
    Sept. 16, 2010 9:23 a.m.

    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.

  • dave4197
    Sept. 16, 2010 9:20 a.m.

    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 wife laughs.

  • LOL
    Sept. 16, 2010 9:20 a.m.

    "Don't listen to the drive-by media. Only me!"
    Conservative guru and talk-radio host to millions, Rush Limbaugh.

  • Hallsy
    Sept. 16, 2010 9:19 a.m.

    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 extreme censorship.

  • Frank Dux
    Sept. 16, 2010 9:14 a.m.

    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.

  • Solomon the Wise
    Sept. 16, 2010 9:09 a.m.

    A filter to ignore selected bloggers would be nice.

  • Frank Dux
    Sept. 16, 2010 9:07 a.m.

    They say that less than 1% of visitors read the message boards. But notice 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.

  • Pagan
    Sept. 16, 2010 9:06 a.m.

    If the poll system worked I would have voted.

    Since that is not the case.....

    How often do you visit or post on the comment boards?
    Multiple times a day.

    How often do the comment boards provide additional information that you find to be beneficial?
    All of the time.

    The 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 everyday.

  • Big_Ben
    Sept. 16, 2010 9:05 a.m.

    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 are respectful.

  • ex missionary
    Sept. 16, 2010 8:59 a.m.

    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.

  • Speaking Up
    Sept. 16, 2010 8:55 a.m.

    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.

  • Big_Ben
    Sept. 16, 2010 8:50 a.m.

    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.

  • UtahRef`
    Sept. 16, 2010 8:48 a.m.

    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.

  • Democrat
    Sept. 16, 2010 8:47 a.m.

    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

  • Reasonable Person
    Sept. 16, 2010 8:39 a.m.

    The reason the 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.

  • arc
    Sept. 16, 2010 8:18 a.m.

    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.