Via BoingBoing (h/t alert reader DS):
Popular Science has an evidence-based reason for shutting down its comment section
Yesterday, the Popular Science website announced that it would no longer allow readers to comment on new stories. Why? Because science, says online editor Suzanne LeBarre, who cited research showing how a minority of uncivilized, vitriolic comments can skew readers' understanding of the content of a story and contribute to political/ideological polarizations of opinion. Mother Jones wrote about the same study more in-depth earlier this year....
7 comments:
I don't think Digby shut down her comments for the same reason, but I'd love to hear her rationale.
I back Pop Sci on this decision. Almost every single weather and environmental article I read is innundated with sceptical commentary. Sites either need to police comment threads full time or shut them down... I guess.
The alternative is to allow slander and lies to sit in judgement of works based on fact.
I really wonder if some pro-warming groups are paying people to comment on each and every piece they can find.
It wasn't even skeptical commentary, but sheer, bloody minded refusal to accept scientific results.
It makes me think that I was very fortunate in the commenters at my blog, before I flipped out and shut it off; argumentative and stubborn all, but none of them were pitchers of woo or ideological stiffers who were insistent on grinding their own favorite axes regardless of the actual topic.
Egads. Does this mean you are condemning your own comments section?
Good morning, Mr. Glass.
"If you carry out those results to their logical end--commenters shape public opinion; public opinion shapes public policy; public policy shapes how and whether and what research gets funded--you start to see why we feel compelled to hit the "off" switch"
Actually, isn't that the logical fallacy known as "slippery slope"? Don't you need a scientific study showing the connection between discussion-forums and research-funding to make that statement?
Enjoy the rest of your day.
---Kevin Holsinger
A couple years ago I read of a newspaper in upstate New York that had limited it's commentators to using real names and charging a one-time $5 fee. after that, you could say whatever you wanted.
I really wish I could remember what the name o0f the paper was.
be interesting if driftglass instituted that policy, Don.
Why you bein' so mean to poor ol' country blogger Digby? Some (most) people just prefer to hear themselves talk, without having to read the comments of a buncha poorly informed ignoramuses in the peanut gallery.
Post a Comment