The Arizona Republic uses the nuclear option to clean up online reader comments. Senior vice president of news and audience development Randy Lovely explains that commenters will no longer be able to hide in the shadows of anonymity:

My views shifted gradually as I held out hope that the community at large would rise to the responsibility of shaping a productive exchange. At first, I defended the range of remarks, then I began to grow concerned about the tenor, and I finally became disgusted.

The final straw came for me earlier this year. In the aftermath of the tragic shooting near Tucson, comments such as these were all too pervasive:

WeElectedIdiots2: “I guess a politician with half a brain is better than the rest of the idiots that get elected.”

AZJavaRooster: “She should be up for Canonization soon! oh, God! she was heard to say, ‘Well if I had half a mind …’ “

ksteele26: “This guy Loughner is a true patriot. Giffords has the blood of millions of the murdered unborn on her hands.”

At no point did I ever consider completely eliminating the community’s ability and right to speak out, but I knew we needed to work toward a solution that would bring greater accountability and responsibility — to your words.

During the past few months, the azcentral staff has been exploring options and experimenting with different technology that will continue to allow an exchange of opinions, but with a goal of reducing meaningless, mean-spirited rhetoric.

Beginning today, azcentral users wishing to comment on any of our blog posts will need to do so through the use of a personal Facebook account. Ultimately, in the next couple of months, the same technology will be in place for all articles on the site.

I’m in full support and hope that the Arizona Daily Star considers doing the same thing to banish the trolls from the sewer its online commentary section has become. Does anyone think for a second that most of those comments would still be made if someone had to sign their name to them?

This article appears in Dec 1-7, 2011.

Getting hassled by The Man Mild-mannered reporter

6 replies on “AZ Republic: No More Mr. Anonymous Guy”

  1. Why not the Tucson Weekly as well, for that matter?

    While I like the idea behind it (removing anonymity), I’m not too keen about requiring a Facebook account to be able to comment on stories. For various reasons, some of us have chosen to delete our Facebook accounts, or never to sign up at all. I’m saddened at the trend of organizations requiring Facebook to use their services (e.g. Spotify).

  2. I have no problem with personally standing behind all of my statements, however I do not have a facebook, which would eliminate me from participating. This I do not agree with.

  4. I sometimes wish there were delete buttons on comments, but then I remember that would mean mine could be deleted, too.

  5. The minute I saw “mean-spirited” in the mix I knew this was headed toward biased censorship. Not that any censorship unbiased. I used my own name or a well-known pseud that anyone could find me through for years. Got death threats and people lied about me and posted personal stuff so others could look me up. Poison my pets or harrass my friends? Not something I’d do, but some
    folks are crazy.

  6. The AZ Daily Star comments are certainly a sewer. It’s a nightmare in there.

    I like how the New York times allows anyone to comment but only vetted comments show up on the story. You have the option of descending into the netherworld of all comments but the NY Times staff does a good job of separating the wheat from the chaff. The result is that productive commentary is visible and the mess of everything else is available. From what I’ve seen their vetting process is unbiased.

    I imagine it takes a fleet of interns to keep that system going. What with how poor the finances are for regional newspapers it seems unlikely the Arizona Republic and the Daily Star will be able to do anything similar.

Comments are closed.