The art of commenting


This thing brought a smile to my face. It does say 153 comments, but they are gone. To meet their commenting maker. The same happend here, with an article about a pedophile priest and people are outraged. Rightfully. The country`s biggest newspaper is denying them the right to express their opinions. Which is something China is doing. But on the other hand…is enabeling the right to comment really a right or a privilege? Does it come automatically or do we have to earn it? The latter option seems a little weird, since “earning the right” is soon connected with “the right kind” of comments. The right kind? Well, even comments have their own standards. And maybe some (or many) of you won`t agree but the democracy and freedom of speech does not necessarily mean “anything goes”. And disabling comments where most people are discussing the angle under which the pikes would go into the bastards who killed those cats are really not adding anything meaningful to the whole debate.

But disabling the comments all-together? Should not a group of journalists examine each and every comment in search for a shred of meaningfulness? Which would be even more alarming if they actually did so and found not a single ounce of meaning. Is weeding out the opinions really better than shutting the whole thing down? If all opinions are equal, does not that mean that they all have the equal right to be expressed or to be banned? What`s your take on the matter?


4 komentarjev na “The art of commenting

  1. maQmIgh

    I am not Abel, to understand how you Cain write “disabeling” and “enabeling”. (*rock banging head sound*)

    When adding inflectional morphemes -ing and -ed to a verb ends in -e, the -e is omitted. This is supposed to be “the mute -e rule”. There are quite some exceptions to this rule: age-ing, see-ing, agree-ing, free-ing…

    As for the comment business…
    Why do you delete comments?
    Because you don’t like them and you Cain!?

  2. Domen

    My view on the matter is here. Scroll down.

    But that is not the case here. I see disabling 😉 the option to comment AT ALL as a very different “solution” from censoring some inappropriate comments.

  3. Brian King

    The fact that they disable comments only on certain articles is very telling. No doubt the recent changes in Delo’s board is related. See no evil, hear no evil.

    The same thing happened in Ireland for many years until victims rose up and outed the scourge of pedophilia in the church (and wider society in general). I hope Slovene victims do too, even if barriers like this are placed in their path.

    It’s a painful process, but one that needs to be done.

  4. Mitja

    Well, it’s their website, they can do whatever they want. And if we don’t like it, we can stop buying the newspaper. A newspaper can pick whatever goal it wants (large readership seems like a reasonable choice, but there can be others – and I suspect there are) and then do whatever it feels will further this goal in the most cost-effective way. If they feel the ability to comment will do that, they should make have comments. If they feel that certain articles have comments that will piss off more people than disabling the comments will, they should disable the comments. And if they find it worthwhile to moderate comments, they should do that. Moderating comments is certainly best in my opinion, but I might feel differently if I had to pay someone to do that.


Vpišite komentar

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.