💬 Join me in feeling sorry for the AL.com staff for comments that hurt their feelings? AL.com shutting down their comments section.

[18Champs]

A real condescending attitude from these folks. Sure, the comments are over the top but I have to ask how much of this is part of the "cancel culture?"

 

[rocknthefreeworld]

Discuss bad. Hurt feefees. Consume only. No discuss.

 

[TideatMileHigh]

It's part of an ongoing trend in media to better control narratives without people calling them out on their bullshit.

"Oh noooo. You aren't allowed to call us out for posting inflammatory shit meant to piss you all off! You nasty little plebs just need to go to work and let us 'educated folk' tell you whats best for you."

 

[BamaFan334]

AJC did this years ago, and with that removed me from riling up the Georgee fans. I just don't think they want to pay the IT expense for having a comments section with decreased revenues in that industry. They cut the fun parts first.

 

[TerryP]

I just don't think they want to pay the IT expense for having a comments section with decreased revenues in that industry.

Open source can power comment sections. Having been in these discussions and seen the move made by several papers under our umbrella it's more about readers feelings. A literal quote from a meeting: "We shouldn't want our readers to feel less educated when others attack them."

 

[rocknthefreeworld]

AJC did this years ago, and with that removed me from riling up the Georgee fans. I just don't think they want to pay the IT expense for having a comments section with decreased revenues in that industry. They cut the fun parts first.

There is a lot of pressure to do something about "Cyber Bullying" that causes them to just give up on comments also. That is where the expense portion comes in. Companies used to be able to leave comments open and just let people post but it is becoming more and more clear that politicians are going to change the rules and make the sites responsible for what people post. That means censorship. Why do you think the push for fighting "fake news" is so strong in some sectors? They get to make companies do the dirty work of suppressing and censoring things while saying they are fighting bullying or fake news or Russian Hackers and it isn't censorship because that stuff shouldn't be allowed anyway.

 

[50+yeartidefan]

Never commented
Didn't read comments but a few times
Didn't see where comments added anything
Could tellwhere bama n AU fans don't like each other when i did read them
Wonder what it cost to remove the comment section?

 

[TerryP]

Wonder what it cost to remove the comment section?

I don't get that question. It didn't cost anything to remove the comments section other than paying the person to remove that section. It appears Advance has done this across the board with all of their outlets.

 

[BamaFan334]

Open source can power comment sections. Having been in these discussions and seen the move made by several papers under our umbrella it's more about readers feelings. A literal quote from a meeting: "We shouldn't want our readers to feel less educated when others attack them."

Ahh, good points.

 

[BamaFan334]

There is a lot of pressure to do something about "Cyber Bullying" that causes them to just give up on comments also. That is where the expense portion comes in. Companies used to be able to leave comments open and just let people post but it is becoming more and more clear that politicians are going to change the rules and make the sites responsible for what people post. That means censorship. Why do you think the push for fighting "fake news" is so strong in some sectors? They get to make companies do the dirty work of suppressing and censoring things while saying they are fighting bullying or fake news or Russian Hackers and it isn't censorship because that stuff shouldn't be allowed anyway.

Good points here as well.

 

[TerryP]

There is a lot of pressure to do something about "Cyber Bullying" that causes them to just give up on comments also. That is where the expense portion comes in. Companies used to be able to leave comments open and just let people post but it is becoming more and more clear that politicians are going to change the rules and make the sites responsible for what people post.

There really isn't that much of an "expense" excuse/reason here. As example, the lady who handled the moderation of the content submitted by readers also answered the phone for missed deliveries on the actual paper. She was being paid $15 an hour before that responsibility was added to her "job description."

I can only speak for the parent company, but in our case it was about keeping comments off the sites. They decided to label the comments section as "under construction" for two years before removing it completely.

There was no cost on the software to run the comments. I seriously doubt Advance paid for theirs. With Isso, HashOver, and the like, it's not a cost measure to remove the software.

Fact is, saying "server space" is a reason for cost isn't really accurate either. These companies own their own.

 

[planomateo]

They should have the removed comments years ago or integrate with Facebook so people can't hide as easy behind anonymity.

With regards to the video, AL.com is leading me to believe they've removed comments during to the personal attacks, which frankly are uncalled for. AL.com should have said they were removing comments and left it at that.

The majority of comments I've seen were ignorant, unnecessary, and meant to be harmful.

 

[UAgrad93]

It took them awhile, but they removed those little chat/message boards as well. People used to attack HS players and coaches and people in general all of the time. I was attacked on there once because I applied for the HC position here when the coach that hired me left to rebuild another program. The anonymous person went on to attack 2 other assistants and the AD as well. I imagine it was from some disgruntled parent that had a beef with the school, so they attacked the individuals as well.

 

[TerryP]

They should have the removed comments years ago or integrate with Facebook so people can't hide as easy behind anonymity.

They did. It's the same add-on as we use here for registrations.

 

[planomateo]

You're right. Wondering if that helped...

 

[50+yeartidefan]

I don't get that question. It didn't cost anything to remove the comments section other than paying the person to remove that section.

Then .....the question was... i wonder what it cost....thats what it cost!!!! Thanks for answering........????

 

[rocknthefreeworld]

There really isn't that much of an "expense" excuse/reason here.

Long term, allowing comments leaves them open to lawsuits, political pressure, boycotts over comments, etc. Cheaper to shut it down.

 

[TerryP]

Long term, allowing comments leaves them open to lawsuits, political pressure, boycotts over comments, etc. Cheaper to shut it down.

I can't speak for Advance, but that's normally covered in terms of use. I'd think it would be in their case as well.