Yesterday afternoon on Gawker.com, Sheila McClear wrote a piece on why newspapers should no longer allow comments on articles.
“Comments are thought to be an added value to a newspaper's site—providing another reason to read. You come for the article, and stay for the interesting discussion,” she wrote. “The only problem is, there is no interesting discussion. Almost never. Not even from the mythical supersmart New York Times readers.”
McClear goes on to provide examples of the inappropriate comments that commonly appear with many newspaper articles online – and the reason why many newspapers have “report this comment” links prominently placed alongside comment sections.
“You could argue that newspapers should rigorously vet and moderate their comments, or at least require them to use their full names. I'd argue that this is a silly misuse of their time; I'm not suggesting that newspapers should actively patrol their comments, like this and some other Web sites do…. I'm suggesting they get rid of them altogether.”
But comments have served newspapers very well in the past several years. USA Today and other newspapers have gotten news tips and information from story commenters, which have improved reporting. In addition, allowing readers to comment – and having reporters or editors participate in those discussions – creates a new positive connection with the community and can help build the newspaper’s brand. Comments drive traffic, too, and encourage readers to return to the newspaper’s Web site multiple times each day.
In NAA’s “Online Community Cookbook,” Rich Gordon of Northwestern University wrote, “Time and again, interactive services have found that interpersonal conversations drive usage and loyalty much better than passive consumption of content.”
But comments are also good for readers. Comments can be entertaining or thought-provoking. They can provide new and interesting information. They can build community.
“Another important usage-driving experience uncovered by Readership Institute research was labeled ‘Connects me with others.’ Users describe sites that foster this experience with words like this: ‘I’m as interested in input from other users as I am in the regular content on this site,’ and ‘A big reason I like this site is what I get from other users.’
NAA’s recent research on user-generated content and Web 2.0 tools confirms this. This is especially true with newspaper site-hosted local business directories and reviews, but it applies to other comments on online newspaper content, as well. Among total respondents to a recent survey on user-generated content, 60 percent said comments or user-contributed reviews on newspaper Web sites are somewhat, very or extremely appealing. Of that 60 percent, more than half are non-newspaper readers.
“The ability to rate comments and reviews in terms of their helpfulness, the ability to see the commenter/reviewer profiles and privately message those people are also interesting to respondents,” according to the report.
The solution to McClear’s criticism of newspaper site comments is improved moderation, community management and active participation by newspaper staff. Removing the commenting ability of newspaper Web sites would hurt both readers and the newspaper.
If McClear doesn’t like comments on articles, she can always just not read them.
To learn more about effective community management on newspaper Web sites, go to www.naa.org/digitaledge/cookbook.
To learn more about user-generated content opportunities for newspaper Web sites, go to www.naa.org/ugcopportunities.
Also, be sure to register for tomorrow's NAA Webinar on UGC.
Note: Some content on NAA.org is only accessible by employees of NAA member newspapers. You will be presented with a sign in page when you click on the links above. Your default user name and password (both!) are your business e-mail address. You can change your password by going to NAA’s Member Center after you have signed in.