Des Moines Register to start using Facebook comments

Why are comments allowed? Because idiots can't pass up the chance to be heard and the rest of us can't pass up the chance to watch the train wreck, and in the end it amounts to a shitload of page views, which apparently means "money" to someone.

We allow people to use handles, but required that they sign up with at very least their real phone numbers. (We call and check after they've registered). That's cut down on a little of the crazy crap, but only a little of it. I don't see us cutting back any more, either, as it's those stories with the crazy long discussions that always have the most page views. They bring people to the site multiple times a day and they keep people on the site, both of which I'm told is great for advertisers.

Online comments make me hate the world, but I can't imagine we'll change our policy any time soon.

 

None of that is to the say there's no legitimate aspect to it, either. I think some of the discussions are interesting and important, and I question whether those would happen the same way if people had their real names attached to it (just like on this board.)

I'm not smart enough to figure out how to separate the trash from the worthwhile stuff. But I don't think the greater good is the real reason why most papers will continue to allow comments.

 

Why are comments allowed? Because idiots can't pass up the chance to be heard and the rest of us can't pass up the chance to watch the train wreck, and in the end it amounts to a shitload of page views, which apparently means "money" to someone.
[/quote]

That is exactly my point. Matt, I agree with you that there is some place for comments, but straight news isn't it. On the smoking ban, for instance . . . the appropriate place to "spout off," is your elected official, not on the pages of a newspaper.

As far as columns and other opinion type stuff I understand comments, I think they are still drivel, but I get it.

Also the idea that comments drive pageviews seems about as stupid to me as the theory that if we put web stuff behind a pay wall, no one will pay. Every word on the website for the paper I work at is behind a pay wall, and that decision worked out just fine for us. We are making money, hiring new people and though we are tiny (10k circ weekly) it seems to me that it has worked out fine.

It might be harder to do on a large scale, but I would be willing to bet that if the major dailies in the US decided that there would be no more freebies at around the same time it would benefit all of them.

Napster was "the end of the music industry," until iTunes came along and gave people an easy way to pay. I think a similar thing would work for newspapers, it would just have to be a commitment from everyone at once, which is a pipe dream.

 

We went this route a few weeks ago. We hadn't allowed comments at all previously, so it added an interactive element to our site. As others have said, it eliminates a good deal of the crap you see elsewhere.

Is Facebook making any money off this, or are they rolling out the widget to further extend their brand?

 

yes take away the ability for a random verbal assault and it gets quiet in a hurry...our paper did the same thing years back when we required confirmed emails for online comments.

 

Several papers are doing this. One I'm familiar with, it appears comments have dropped 75 percent, at least. It wouldn't surprise me that despite all the rhetoric from editors wanting to clean up the comments, that in a year they change the commenting policy because they miss the traffic and interaction.

 

I'm not sure if it really brings that much traffic though. Yes, the raw numbers (overall hits) looks good. However, I think it dissuades unique visitors - normal people get annoyed that a bunch of people shit all over the bottom of articles, so most of your hits are coming from the trolls and others navel-gazing at their own comments.

 

It's such a great idea ... maybe this board should only allow Facebook members to comment.

 

I'd be okay with that...if you have something worth saying put your name to it. If not, keep quiet.

 

I would, were I in the habit of making such comments on such forums -- since I want no part of Facebook, now or in the future.

 

I've seen some other sites that are linked to Facebook. One site will tell me which of my FB friends recommended an article.

But all people who are complaining have to do is remember that if you can't be a troll on desmoinesregister.com, you can still be one at the Des Moines Topix page. And Topix cares not one whit what people do with their accounts.

The only thing that bothers me about Topix, since I don't go to that site, is phone calls from people who think we run the site. We waste about 20 to 25 minutes every time some one calls to get a comment off "our" site when they mean Topix and they don't believe we can't do something about it or that we don't own it.*

* - Yes, this has happened. Several times.

Edit: And in fact, it happened again today. Some poor woman who doesn't even know why she's being picked on. The reporter who took the call said he could tell she was trying not to cry.

 

Four reasons:

1. It gives readers a voice, in the same way letters to the editor give readers a voice in the newspaper on a day-to-day basis. This is the nice, journalistic argument. But I admit, this argument only encourages vetted comments, which some places (but few newspapers) use.

2. It drives hits.

3. Everyone else does it, so you look thin-skinned if you don't, and readers expect commenting power.

4. It drives hits.

Also: They won't be exported. The facebook comments will still be in the same place as the old ones.