Bloomberg Latest To Kill Comments Because Really, Who Gives A Damn About Localized User Communities?
from the I-can't-hear-you dept
We've been noting how the trend du jour among news outlets has been to not only kill off your community comments section, but to proudly proclaim you're doing so because you really value conversation. It's of course understandable that many writers and editors don't feel motivated to wade into the often heated comment section to interact with their audience. It's also understandable if a company doesn't want to spend the money to pay someone to moderate comments. But if you do decide to reduce your community's ability to engage, do us all a favor and don't pretend it's because you really adore talking to your audience.The latest war on comments comes courtesy of the folks over at Bloomberg. You may have noticed that the Bloomberg media empire recently went through a bit of a consolidation and redesign under the leadership of former Verge editor-in-chief Josh Topolsky. Buried among the vertigo-inducing fonts and amusing new 404 warning, is, you'll note, a very obvious lack of user comments. This is, to hear Topolsky tell it, because comments don't actually reflect your community:
"I've looked at the analytics on the commenting community versus overall audience. You’re really talking about less than one percent of the overall audience that’s engaged in commenting, even if it looks like a very active community,” he says. “In the grand scheme of the audience, it doesn't represent the readership."In other words, because most users can't be bothered to comment, we're going to eliminate a major artery for input for those users who do choose to closely participate with the authors and website. No worry, says Topolsky -- just because Bloomberg no longer gives a damn what you say to its authors regarding individual pieces, that doesn't mean the website isn't listening to its userbase when it comes to quirky color and font schemes:
"Nothing about the new Bloomberg is set in stone; Topolsky says the entire process is iterative, and that includes the comments. The digital team will be monitoring reader behavior across desktop and mobile to see how they’re reacting to and interacting with the new site. For example, on launch day, they experimented with header height so see what readers like better. On mobile, where they’re working to “find the right balance between design and imagery and text,” Topolsky plans to experiment with different formats — more text versus more color versus a grid — to figure out what draws readers in."While at least Topolsky seems open to the idea of comments returning, he still misses the point: watching analytics to judge responses to design changes isn't the same as actually allowing a conversation with your audience. If you actually do value your readership, you wouldn't be outsourcing their conversations to the feral and intellectually-stunted Facebook mind pool. As some Techdirt regulars have noticed, local comments encourage local community, and despite all the hand-wringing about trolls out of control, studies have recently shown it only takes treating commenters like real people (and a little moderating) to dramatically raise the discourse bar. This is your audience and your community, not a raging cacophony of encroaching cybernetic hyenas in need of a good napalming.
I still think the lowly comment section is getting a bad rap during this latest site redesign phase (led by folks like ReCode and Vox), and it's leading to a continued droll homogenization of not only website design, but of participatory news conversation itself.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Comments have value to both the site and it's readers
There are other sites like the "Shark Tank" blog on "ComputerWorld" where I might still go there if they didn't have comments, but I certainly wouldn't be as regular, and I never comment on that site, but love the input of the regulars, much of it totally off topic.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Comments have value to both the site and it's readers
[ link to this | view in thread ]
For a news site there really doesn't need to be comments from readers if the article is a news article. But I think a news organization should have a separate, unmoderated forum where people can comment on news articles the news site publishes. (Similar to newsgroups of the usenet). And of course, just like newspapers, there can be letters to the editor where the editors pick which ones to publish. A website is not obligated to publish content other than what they themselves have produced. There is no 'right' to comment or any 1st amendment issue in not having comments. There really are other avenues available to comment on what a particular website says.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It seems so much easier to simply comment on the same page as the news story. Instead of spending time doing searches for comments scattered across the internet.
I'm going to have to call BS on the use of using social media to comment on news stories. It seems like a inefficient waste of time compared to simply commenting on the same webpage as the news story itself. I think using social media to justify removing website comments is a disingenuous evasion being used in order to give a non-answer, answer, to the readers.
More than likely the real answer has to do with right to be forgotten takedowns, advice from lawyers, cost savings, government pressure, or simply thin skinned people who make the mistake of reading internet comments.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Places like Bloomberg and The Virge would never notice my interests or me on their sites. I must note that I generally despise the "colorful" layouts of The Virge so by extension Bloomberg as a waste of my time and bandwidth. Way too much eye-ball garbage to wade though to find interesting material.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
There is a right to comment; what you may have meant was that there's no right to comment directly on that website. I agree that there's no First Amendment issue with not having comments on the website. But nobody said there was. The issue is not a First Amendment one. It's one about whether that's a smart business decision and whether it's good for public discussion of important topics.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Analytics and Comments
First of all, I think it is incredibly high. I bet there are a lot of sites that would love to get that kind of engagement.
Secondly, how much did he look into the analytics of how many people read the comments? I don't often comment on sites, but I almost always read the comments, especially on my favourite sites. That's added value for me.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
"Should we add another graphic ele..." is a sentence that begs to be interrupted with a right cross to the jaw.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Of course, most news sites aren't designed to encourage commenting. Since Techdirt is basically an opinion blog based on other people's reportings, it lends itself to discussion a lot more than others.
And despite the trolls, it's pretty civil (and spam free) so thank you!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
offsite comments
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bllomberg has gone downhill
I would read comments and I would write my own.
Now, I visit Bloomberg 2 times a day.
The redesign is hideous as the blue and red colors hurt my eyes.
The removal of comments is dismaying.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Maybe I'm the oddball here. I refuse to join sites like Discus to comment. I have no intention to allow myself to be folded and mutilated for the benefit of datamining, just for the privilege of commenting. So if your idea is to pass it off to some 3ᴿᴰ party to control the flow of commenting, I'm not going to show up. Because readers comment, they become connected to your site. Take that away, there is less reason to show up as opposed to another site that carries the same info but does allow comments. Eventually the readership no longer cares about your site. Then when they don't put eyeballs on the page there goes the advertising dollar and suddenly the big bad internet has become fickle and to blame.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
I'd argue the exact opposite actually, news articles in particular should have a comments section, as it allows people to discuss what's being reported on, and note any incorrect claims being made, or simple but significant mistakes.
If they want to be like the 'news' agencies on tv, where they 'report', and the viewers listen, and that's the end of it, well, there's already more than enough of that, and it's old. With the tools available today, there's really no reason that the discussion can't be two-ways, with one side saying something, the other responding, and so on.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
commentator deralaand suggests an offsite commenting solution; news forums like reddit, Freerepublic, Fark do that but they don't provide an opportunity to comment at the original article; perhaps if a major browser enabled a version of the old Third Voice it would provide readers a more organic way to interact with stories and each other than news forums like reddit, and provide a little stick to incentive media to allow commenting on their own site so as to not lose total control of it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Analytics and Comments
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[quote]On mobile, where they’re working to “find the right balance between design and imagery and text,”[/quote]
I think he meant to say "find the right balance between paid advertising and less content, forcing readers to scroll more than they should have to. Hot damn, do I love controlled apps giving users no ability to customize."
As for the article, I've noticed the trend all over the place. To be honest, I don't know how I feel about it. I'm torn.
Because the bottom line is, I absolutely love the idea of comments disallowing "The author is a liberal. Why else would he write this crap!" bullshit plaguing the internet.
On the other hand, well, it shuts everyone up.
Could be worse. They could have enacted a system that allows readers to hide comments they don't like.
*snickers*
Sorry. Had to say it. >:P
I can count on one hand the number of sites I post comments to.
I feel commenting on most sites is pointless, lost in a shuffle of opinions that aren't worth reading.
Hey, speaking of comments not worth reading, what in the hell happened with out_of_the_blue? Did he get banned? Heh.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Idiots.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Comments have value to both the site and it's readers
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Analytics and Comments
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Las Vegas' newspaper too
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
This is a bit of an unfair shot -- a properly done "user experience" is one where you don't notice the experience at all, so the badly done ones stick out like a sore thumb and appear to represent the entire field (witness Metro on the desktop). However, I do think there is more than a grain of truth in the assertion that the UX folks are not a force for good.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
What they DON'T want is a place where people can post corrections to a story when they screw up the reporting.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Comments reveal their lies!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
typo
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Comments are part of the news
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sure!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
comments on online news outlets
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bloomberg comments
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Comments reveal their lies!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
It's time to let it go! That is why most Conservatives AND Liberals hate Trump because he has had it with it as he has seen what failed business looks like and doesn't want America to be that way.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What cowards
[ link to this | view in thread ]