Irish Times website no longer allowing comments

CrabRevolution

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119893068#Comment_119893068

How can the Village be construed as defending the Church? You can't call Ingle's article callous without explicitly acknowledging the abuse that occurred.

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119893090#Comment_119893090

Yes, it was a title awarded by the pope no less. So what?

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119893078#Comment_119893078

Amazing, just jump right in to attacking the poster not the post

No, I don't. FFS 🙄

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119893100#Comment_119893100

Yes of course I've read it and it is indeed vile. There are those now trying to stir up controversy about a nothing article from Ingle and (whether this is their goal, or not) it will deflect attention away from the actual issue and those who covered up and ignored these vile abuses.

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119893148#Comment_119893148

Again someone else replying to what was not written.

I never said they were unique to such schools but it's obvious that the fee-paying ones in particular have this sort of culture around them and it's not a healthy one imo.

FrancieBrady

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119906581#Comment_119906581

Abuse everywhere had 'omerta'...it's a ridiculous thing to get hung up on here. And doesn't address the sad 'woe is me' gloating in the piece.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119906557#Comment_119906557

i set out right below why i asked and i think given that context your vociferous repeated attempts to make this discussion about anything other than the shitfest the article was is misguided and obvious

so yeah its a fair question to ask and you've answered it squarely, fair play

you're still 100% wrong on it like, and in a small small minority as far as ive seen

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119749306#Comment_119749306

Nine months have passed since the IT pulled its comments section while promising to allow readers comment on selected articles in future.

An ample gestation period but no sign of the promised offspring. No one here will be surprised because no one believed a word of it.

IT have cut themselves off from spontaneous reactions and they are increasingly out of touch with their readers and Irish people in general (the former being a small and highly unrepresentative cohort of the latter).

hamburgham

Was just thinking about this today. Really miss the comments. The paper is definitely diminished without them.

Used love when the comments were predominantly in disagreement with the thrust of an article, let the writers see how out if touch they were. They can’t really insult their readers the way they insult and patronise others who disagree with them.

There was a piece in the IT a few weeks ago with ‘the Ireland is full brigade’ quoted in the sub heading. Really, really pixxed me off. Would have loved to see the comments on that piece.

Hotblack Desiato

IT have cut themselves off from spontaneous reactions and they are increasingly out of touch with their readers and Irish people in general (the former being a small and highly unrepresentative cohort of the latter).

You don't have to agree with everything printed in a paper you know. I'm a subscriber but certainly don't agree with many of the opinion pieces they print - especially the semi-regular ones from bishops!

There's still the letters page and some articles rightly come in for strong criticism there.

I am surprised though that they haven't brought back the comments yet, it makes a website a lot more "sticky" which is why the likes of the Journal do it. I suppose the IT gets the lion's share of its digital revenue from subscribers rather than advertisers so it's less of an imperative for them to encourage repeated visits of an article to read / make comments.

There were some right oddballs in the IT comments though especially in the early days. (anyone remember "Babs" or her many uber-catholic incarnations?) Less so when it became subscriber only but there was still one guy who posted morning noon and night and must have gone through something like 20 accounts after each was banned in turn for abusive comments.

Brussels Sprout

Used love when the comments were predominantly in disagreement with the thrust of an article

That was pretty much the comments section under every article. I think it's because the people most motivated to set up accounts to comment were the ones who were the angriest. I remember even the "Ask Roe" advice columns had comments that were all just people accusing the paper of making up the questions.

Separate to that I noticed that any article about Mick Wallace and Clare Daly or Russia was infested people people praising them and criticising the West. That's not a majority opinion in this country but it always was on those comments sections.

elperello

I have been reading the IT for a long time.

I also have an online account.

I have no interest in reading a lot of comments about articles I can make my own mind up about.

If I ever find that I agree with everything in the paper I will reconsider my support of it.

Strumms

i think in Ireland, life has never been more controversial. Through covid, the influx of 75,000 Ukrainians who we are housing financing and supporting, November figures showed that Overall, a total of 887,500 people were on some form of hospital waiting list at the end of November, including almost 97,000 children.

When the additional 243,000 people awaiting CTs, MRIs or ultrasounds nationally are added, the total number awaiting hospital care is over 1.1 million,or more than one-fifth of the entire population.

Yet, our media overlords don’t want us engaging with their journalists, their articles or probably even each other…neither do our politicians im sure… funny old ‘ democracy ‘ this has turned into.

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120285312#Comment_120285312

You can thank Mr Putin for the plight of our Ukrainian visitors.

I agree with you that we definitely have big problems in the health service.

The IT is owned by a trust so no overlords there.

Our democracy is in rude health.

https://www.sgi-network.org/2022/Ireland/Quality_of_Democracy

Strumms

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120285362#Comment_120285362

The SGI report isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. It’s organized by a pro EU and pro globalist company called Bertelsmann. The worlds largest media conglomerate and a facilitator / cheerleader of globalism and this schtick we are falling victim to.

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120285441#Comment_120285441

Farage-esque "analysis" there.

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120285441#Comment_120285441

Please yourself I'm not going rooting for something you will approve of.

Maybe to save time you should link to a report that shows our democracy is in trouble.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120285312#Comment_120285312

You seem to be conflating a hamfisted running of a health service with the concept of democracy and access to voting. Ranting about Overlords and Globalists doesn't really keep the debate in the realms of reality.

Plus regrading the IT, it predates the internet by decades: why the sudden decision that being unable to comment on an internet article is the death of democracy? Was our democracy dying in the 60s? 70s? 80s? When the IT published without this direct feedback mechanism?

The letters to the editor hasn't gone away, but if you're metric for democracy depends on anonymous comments underneath a web article, then we truly live in a boring, stable democracy.

Seth Brundle

Mod: keep the language clean. One post deleted

elperello

This is an example of the strength of the Letters Page.

Ten individuals writing under their own name comprehensively answering a letter from a group of politicians published the day before.

If it was an open comments section you would have to wade through a couple of hundred posts to get a few such succinct comments.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/2023/02/25/appeasing-russian-aggression-will-not-bring-peace/

This is the letter they were replying to.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/2023/02/24/russias-war-on-ukraine/

cheese sandwich

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289045#Comment_120289045

It’s not an either/or situation though, is it?

I agree that it was good to see those letters in response to the rather mealy-mouthed contribution from the politicians. However I doubt the IT would be willing to publish that much criticism of one of their own articles.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120285312#Comment_120285312

I think the spamming of comments and forums with extreme views and paranoid agendas makes them impossible to police, and it's that what has made many sites withdraw them.

That it also removed a lot of opposing viewpoints is more of happy coincidence. The price is balance and credibility. The sites have decided this is unavoidable trade off.

You can see on this thread where is been derailed with tirades unrelated to the subject.

yagan

I think the upshot of the last decade is that people who publish on social media must be held as accountable as traditional media when it comes to spreading misinformation that is socially divisive.

A bunch of ghouls can brigade a comments section with subtle comments but that doesn't mean the article is unsound, even if the writer has a grating persona.

However all that aside I do think the IT has probably transitioned badly to this new plain. They've thrown up way too much garbage content that can't be filtered by subscribers. Usually when in the old print days I'd immediately consign the property porn/lifestyle sections to the bin, sometimes just leaving them in the shop if out walking. Now all drivel appears on the main subscriber feed with no way to filter.

They might have kept me as a subscriber if I'd the option to filter out the fill.

I did get a phone call when I cancelled my sub, but they never asked why.

growleaves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120285248#Comment_120285248

Why does a comment section need to reflect 'majority opinion'? The IT itself is like a brick wall of official attitudes, so its nice to see varying opinions as well - left or right.

The same people who would like to see these commenters banned from IT would throw a strop if they turned up on boards instead.

Or should anyone with a dissenting opinion just sit in their room and write it in their diary? Or better yet just think bad thoughts but never utter them!

growleaves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289045#Comment_120289045

A tour-de-force of total confidence that a compromise peace deal would mainly help Russia. Though they may be right I would love to know how can they be so completely certain.

Printing ten in a row just signals to readers that this is the dominant opinion in society that they're meant to hold themselves.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289839#Comment_120289839

"Official attitudes"? Come on, dial back that kinda talk. Why does a private paper have to reflect any editorial slant except its own? Every single paper now has an angle, and some, especially the tabloids, don't even try to hide that. Going double for polemical UK papers like the Mail or Telegraph. You'll be doing well to find any newspaper in the last 100 years that has a deeply objective view - if that's what you want then... I dunno. Stick with Reuters or something that sticks to the facts? And even that gets sticky depending on the subject. That's the nature of politics.

And as mentioned, Letters to the Editor still exists, still contains contrarian thoughts and opinions. But just because it isn't 100 barely legible comments about CoVid being a hoax, doesn't mean some rigorous intellectual dissent is being lost.

yagan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289839#Comment_120289839

Our world has changed, traditional media were gate keepers, now we're all publishers, including me when I hit the "post comment" button.

However I do expect a paid news service to stick to basic reportable facts as much as possible. Instead the IT and many legacy outlets feel they must compete with the online swirl of opinions with multiple offerings that would never have been proffered when ink and paper was a primary consideration.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289839#Comment_120289839

The problem is comment sections are usually flooded with predominantly extreme opinions. Which is often being fueled, (created even) by having a anonymous platform in the first place.

growleaves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289870#Comment_120289870

The long-term problem is that, as you see especially since around 2010 or so, people get so used to there being "one opinion" on an issue that they feel any independent thought is an irritant and that anyone expressing a different view is a nuisance.

See where @Brussels Sprout said that Daly-style lefists (I'm not a leftist myself) are "infesting" IT comment section. Extreme rhetoric and very nasty. But I have to 'dial back' my talk that the IT reflects officialdom? (Which it obviously does)

There's no way that anyone would spontaneously become a Black and Ukrainian nationalist, who otherwise dislikes white men, and supports feminism but then is also anti-feminist when its comes to trans right *without* top-down direction. Because that is an incoherent mishmash of opinions which you could not hold unless to learned to hold them. You are taking direction from a streamlined consensus.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289863#Comment_120289863

Russia's past behavior I assume.

If it's 99% of what they receive. Would they be more correct in printing 50% of either side of an argument.

growleaves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289879#Comment_120289879

I think you are wrong.

For the reason that before the Irish Press newspaper shut down and when the Irish Examiner was more independent than it is now - and especially prior to the 1960s - there was a broader range of published views in print media.

This is even true of the Irish Times itself, particularly before the editorship of Conor Brady, and it used to be considered a 'conspiracy theory' that Brady was taking the paper in a more politically liberal direction. How does that look now?

Independent commenters try to fill the gap themselves with spontaneous comments on Facebook, newspaper web sites, site like boards and politics.ie, but get told that they lack legitimacy.

Over time, this leads a lot of people to scoff at traditional outlets because of the tendentiousness of their claim to speak for the whole country or a majority of people.

growleaves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289894#Comment_120289894

I don't blame outlets for taking away comment sections that are a nightmare to moderate.

However I'm not personally going to celebrate the elimination of independent views. It gives people notions that their opinion is the only opinion, that everything they don't like is part of an irrelevant fringe.

Mainstream posters who adhere to all the acceptable views on things can themselves get very extreme, angry and off-balance if they perceive that other views don't deserve an airing. Scapegoat-fever against "ratlickers" and "Putinbots" has demonstrated that in spades

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289895#Comment_120289895

The flip side of that is the majority view, or less extreme views are disproportionately unrepresented.

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289591#Comment_120289591

No you are correct the two could exist in tandem.

My post was to illustrate how useful the letters page is.

They regularly publish criticism of the paper's content.

yagan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289910#Comment_120289910

Perhaps you're right.

But looking back on those times you have to acknowledge that most of what was printed was information, personal ads, mart prices, commodity and basic food prices, information relevant to everyday life. Opinion pages were a page along with the letters.

Now it feels like outfits like the IT are only about opinion, as much a social media bubble as any conspiracy wormhole.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289928#Comment_120289928

Its those "independent" views that have sawed the platform (branch) from under themselves by their extreme views and unreasonable behavior.

If they have enough like-minded support it will be viable to support a sympathetic platform. No one's obliged to provide one for them.

Theres a certain irony in implying opinions that are mainstream are not independently formed themselves.

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289863#Comment_120289863

Usually the number of letters represents the balance of contribution of letter writers.

I doubt the readers of the IT are open to being told what to think.

gormdubhgorm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119122684#Comment_119122684

In this case I don't think it is a conspiracy theory. It is the media trying to regain some control. Years ago newspapers were 'it'(pre internet) and the only counter argument was in the opinions pages of said papers. Which were closely controlled and vetted.

You only have to look at you tube how it quietly removed the 'dislike' counts on videos. A PR control type of thing,

In saying all that though, I find the comments section on online newspapers akin to 'pubtalk' a lot of 'mouths'.

But as the OP said it gives a small snapshot into how the masses view a topic. And it allows you to read between the lines of the more extreme comments - mixed with the more moderate considered ones. The comments section was almost like a 'voxpop' of readers on the street. It does occasionally get silly though with commenters obviously trying to get a rise out of others - who take the bait.

growleaves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289932#Comment_120289932

There is very little danger of that happening, as the 'official' view tends to be blanketed on society in an overwhelming fashion. Murals of Tony Holohan, blue and yellow flags on every street in Dublin, every café with a 'Support Gay Marriage' sign in its window.

Plus even on this specific issue named columnists have more status and greater standing than 'Billybob55'.

growleaves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289955#Comment_120289955

Well I did say earlier in the thread that people should think about starting their own blogs and newspapers rather than expect the IT to change which it won't.

But I understand the dissatisfaction with 'consensus opinion' which I'm trying to articulate.

Yes its true many people must spontaneously agree with the dominant view - I'm not implying they are totally artificial. Or that 'contrarianism' is always right or useful.

I do detect a kind of artificiality though in implying that most people hold all the correct opinions - how could they possibly be true unless vast swathes of people are on autopilot? The exact line up of rejection of Irish nationalism in combination with embrace of Black and Ukrainian nationalism, adherence to feminism except where it contradicts x and y. Its such a particular brew made up of so many ingredients! And it just happens to be what every right-thinking person believes....

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289895#Comment_120289895

See where @Brussels Sprout said that Daly-style lefists (I'm not a leftist myself) are "infesting" IT comment section. Extreme rhetoric and very nasty. But I have to 'dial back' my talk that the IT reflects officialdom? (Which it obviously does)

I'm not the debate police. What's obvious to you is not obvious to others and smells of Conspiracy adjacent eyebrow waggling that somehow the Times are dictating mainstream thought. It's patent nonsense in a world where printed media has never been less relevant given social media effectively took over the position of being the origin of Discourse. If the Times is "official" then they're doing a terrible job of it. While I doubt their property porn sections are exactly endearing to the common reader.

And TBH even if we indulge in the idea of the Times as official, curated opinion, fine I'll agree to disagree ... ... why do Comments section remain immune to that interrogation? Do you think there isn't influence, paid or otherwise, at play here in trying to shape opinion? Or invested parties who go out of their way to push a specific angle? Heck on Boards and this very forum there's at least one known Influencer. If anything Comments are even less trustworthy precisely because there's zero vetting. God knows what ChatGPT and the like will do for that; you don't even need to hire some chump in India anymore, if you wanna flood Comments sections with (say) anti western rhetoric. If anything it'll probably get worse.

By way of example of the value of Comments: I see the journal running an article about "15 minute cities" which has inexplicably become a big conspiracy theory de Jour. The comments section is awash with theorists talking shíte. If Comments are the true barometer of mass opinion then clearly the majority think 15 Minute Cities are a conspiracy. It's an extreme example, but what possible value do comments bring here?

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289968#Comment_120289968

Well we are talking specifically about the comments section in media and Irish Times specifically.

I've not seen what you're suggesting on every street or cafe in Dublin. So it's a ridiculous argument to begin with.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289968#Comment_120289968

Ah. There it is. Frankly it's a little insulting to insinuate herd mentality on people for externalising support in something you don't. Sometimes most people support something and aren't being misled, or fooled, or the dumb masses. Maybe people just want to express their support for something as they see fit: this talk of "official" opinion a vulgar dismissal of that attempt to show solidarity.

Flinty997

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289987#Comment_120289987

I'm in complete agreement on all this.

growleaves

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120290007#Comment_120290007

DCC were putting up Ukrainian flags all over Dublin city centre before most people knew much about Ukraine, pre-empting thought.

I do think it is media-led (and other institution-led) to an extent. Maybe I'm over-interpreting the media's role in this, I accept that's possible.

As I said at the time, we went immediately from people being accused of being super-spreaders to being accused of being pro-Putin agents without catching our breath. There was one poster on boards calling for unvaccinated Canadian protestors to be shot dead and literally three days later he was accusing other posters of being pro-Russian traitors. This is considered a 'mainstream' sensible poster.

Surely if you genuinely dislike vulgarity you must not be too impressed by this kind of thing?

Where do these people get the confidence to denounce other people in the bitterest terms (albeit only pseudonymously)? I do think it is partly the feeling that every institution (including newspapers) are on the 'right side'. There is a lot of conformism in Irish society.

yagan

Oh come now growleaves, given freedom of choice the first thing people do is copy eachother.

Newspapers once were vitally important for information, whereas now they've been superseded, first by radio, then by TV and now by the internet. Sports organisations have their websites now, societies have their own FB pages for announcements etc.... The only people who actively depend on the print media are those who never fully transitioned to digital.

The IT is more like a viewspaper now, and I certainly haven't missed it since I let my sub lapse.

Loafing Oaf

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120289928#Comment_120289928

Yeah I'd rather the comments were still there too but I don't see what's in it for the IT in a business sense, when set against the ever-present danger than one of the mentalist regulars would post something libellous at 4 in the morning...

MerryCoffee

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058247654/irish-times-website-no-longer-allowing-comments

MSM are not interested in our opinions... they have agenda to play.

Brussels Sprout

As I said at the time, we went immediately from people being accused of being super-spreaders to being accused of being pro-Putin agents without catching our breath.

An alternative way at looking at the same things: The people dining out on contrarian Covid opinions suddenly latched on to contrarian Ukrainian opinions once the pandemic had subsided. They've got their contrarian climate change opinions locked & loaded, ready to go.

Sam Russell

Why would the IT want to allow comments on a web site without control over scurrilous posters?

They would need mods that are likely to need funding, and need some form of legal cover against blowback from the scurrilous posters.

Just not worth the risk - and for what gain?

Nah, just the letters page will do nicely. The green ink brigade are simple to spot.