Comments on: Washington Post Still Not Getting It http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/01/23/washington-post-still-not-getting-it/ Tue, 06 Jan 2009 09:08:57 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Leslie http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/01/23/washington-post-still-not-getting-it/#comment-38 Leslie Mon, 23 Jan 2006 20:23:25 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/01/23/washington-post-still-not-getting-it/#comment-38 Dan -- Thanks for the thoughtful commentary on the WaPo situation, which I referenced in my own blog post on the subject. Just like the wikitorial problem at the LA Times last summer, this issue raises profound questions regarding the balance between editorial integrity and open dialog. By closing down comments on the site all the Post did was shut down the conversation. They missed an opportunity to turn critics into loyal readers. Traditional media organizations need to realize that "the horse has left the barn". This isn't just about editorial ... it's about survival. Dan — Thanks for the thoughtful commentary on the WaPo situation, which I referenced in my own blog post on the subject. Just like the wikitorial problem at the LA Times last summer, this issue raises profound questions regarding the balance between editorial integrity and open dialog. By closing down comments on the site all the Post did was shut down the conversation. They missed an opportunity to turn critics into loyal readers. Traditional media organizations need to realize that “the horse has left the barn”. This isn’t just about editorial … it’s about survival.

]]> By: Weblogsky http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/01/23/washington-post-still-not-getting-it/#comment-37 Weblogsky Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:49:59 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/01/23/washington-post-still-not-getting-it/#comment-37 <strong>Dan Gillmor on Washington Post Comments...</strong> Dan Gillmor's been posting about the Washington Post's removal of comments capabiltiy from its blog. In his latest on the subject, Dan says that the Post failed to set up its comment system with sufficient due diligence. They allowed freeform...... Dan Gillmor on Washington Post Comments…

Dan Gillmor’s been posting about the Washington Post’s removal of comments capabiltiy from its blog. In his latest on the subject, Dan says that the Post failed to set up its comment system with sufficient due diligence. They allowed freeform……

]]> By: jonl http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/01/23/washington-post-still-not-getting-it/#comment-36 jonl Mon, 23 Jan 2006 14:39:03 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/01/23/washington-post-still-not-getting-it/#comment-36 High volume comment sites, just like sites with forums, inevitably need some form of moderation or monitoring, but that need is mitigated somewhat by an authentication requirement. The need's still there, though, and often overlooked. My guess is that the Post didn't budget for comment moderation and didn't know where to find skilled moderators, so they backed off. An authentication requirement and 8 hrs/day of moderation, along with a real commitment to interactivity, would solve their problem. High volume comment sites, just like sites with forums, inevitably need some form of moderation or monitoring, but that need is mitigated somewhat by an authentication requirement. The need’s still there, though, and often overlooked. My guess is that the Post didn’t budget for comment moderation and didn’t know where to find skilled moderators, so they backed off. An authentication requirement and 8 hrs/day of moderation, along with a real commitment to interactivity, would solve their problem.

]]> By: Craig McGinty http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/01/23/washington-post-still-not-getting-it/#comment-35 Craig McGinty Mon, 23 Jan 2006 12:31:30 +0000 http://citmedia.org/blog/2006/01/23/washington-post-still-not-getting-it/#comment-35 Would a newspaper be willing to print a letter which had no name or address? Of course not. So why be so slack in not asking people to leave some sort of reference to who they are? It is as though the Washington Post didn't want comments to work so they could at least say 'well we tried, but look what happens'. Would a newspaper be willing to print a letter which had no name or address? Of course not.
So why be so slack in not asking people to leave some sort of reference to who they are?
It is as though the Washington Post didn’t want comments to work so they could at least say ‘well we tried, but look what happens’.

]]>