The Forum of Fargo-Moorhead ending anonymous comments

I like the idea, but do papers that do this also stop allowing anonymous sources to appear in stories.

http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/337362/

 

freedom ENC (and maybe all) papers made this switch -- allowing facebook users only to comment -- a while back. it seems to have reduced fools, as well as overall comments.

 

Don't know, but those are similar yet not identical situations. You certainly can't equate the two, if what you mean is unnamed (in the story) sources. I don't know any paper that would quote an anonymous source.

 

For the last time, they're not "anonymous" sources. Someone knows who they are and with most newspapers it's at least the reporter and maybe a couple of his editors. Anonymous posters are another matter.

 

they are not 'anonymous' sources. also: "we have been conflicted with ..." Seriously?

 

This. "Anonymous sources" aren't.

If somebody wants to comment on a story, make them meet the letter-to-the-editor standard.

 

Should newspapers allow unnamed comments, then, as long as they know the identity of commentors?

 

Not to mention, the sources are (usually) giving out valuable information that they would not be able to give if they are named.

Anonymous posters aren't giving out valuable information. They're just spouting their opinion.

 

I just think it's amazing the publisher wants others to use real names when he is unwilling to do so in his other line of work. The funny thing is the newspaper used to use his stage name when they used to write articles on him without any note that he is the owner's son.

I believe a big reason for the change was the negative comments whenever a former TV newscaster-turned-columnist with a recent DUI arrest had anything on the website.