Irish Times website no longer allowing comments

Stark

"X" totally censors speech. When people like Musk talk about "free" speech they mean they're in the position to dictate the terms.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121146428#Comment_121146428

Who mentioned twitter? Stick to the subject instead of moving the goalposts. The Irish Times are not censoring.

Twitter has a terms and conditions, and a code of conduct. Moderation too to police the above. The issue getting muddied by Musk's takeover, sacking of moderation capacity and abstraction of what constituted an infraction now.

If you call that "censorship", then I can't help you cos it isn't censorship. It might be open to the agenda of the individual CEO, but it's only "censorship" for the sake of some hyperbole. Again it sounds more that opinions you like are not getting airtime and construing that as suppression. You don't like the Irish Times to begin with so starting at a conclusion and working backwards. "Censorship" more dramatic and sexy than simple prudence.

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121146449#Comment_121146449

You said

Private enterprises by definition cannot censor

That was the essence of your defence of the IT. Or perhaps your personal definition of “private enterprise” excludes both the IT and Elon Musk’s many undertakings😋

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121146460#Comment_121146460

You've lost me, or yourself it's not clear. You're calling the IT shuttering it's comments section censorship cos it sounds more malevolent than the Ockham's Razor reality. It plainly isn't by definition, while they're entitled to enable as much or little Right To Reply as they see fit. As long as it's all in their terms of use. I note you keep ignoring the remaining "comments" that exist, bar a sarky dismissal, and had so before the internet. Why is that? The email address is there, the extra effort happily nuking the keyboard rage merchants. No great loss. Comments still exist, only reverted to a former state.

If you wanna talk Twitter let's talk Twitter. If you wanna talk Irish Times we can do that too, but fundamentally both don't apply censorship by the definition of the word no matter how hard you insist. And there's a world of difference between a codified decision by the IT and Musk's mercurial "however I feel like" leadership of Twitter such that there's little overlap TBH. Taking other news outlets might be more useful for debate.

For clarity: I'm a moderator. I delete comments from time to time, infract others. Am I a censor? It seems like any formal removal of user content is supression by your definition.

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121146327#Comment_121146327

As if there's no abuse or defamation on Facebook!

Would you give that sort of private information to a site like Boards? I certainly wouldn't.

The Guardian does have comments.

Years ago the prevailing internet wisdom was that a comments section drives traffic. The Irish Times was free, then subscription only, then free again, now subscription again. It has some advertising but doesn't gain much from it I'd imagine compared to subscriptions. So there's little or no benefit in having people read the same article repeatedly just to catch up on the comments. But there is a very real potential downside in libel and defamation, and unless and until our defamation laws are reformed there's no benefit only risk for them in having comments return.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121146621#Comment_121146621

But there is a very real potential downside in libel and defamation, and unless and until our defamation laws are reformed there's no benefit only risk for them in having comments return

Just on this: theJournal closes comments for all articles pertaining to ongoing court cases for that very reason. The prosaic, likely reality for the IT shutting it's comments for similar reasons, aside from the hassle & cost of moderation in a squeezed industry, less sexy than talk of censorship by a "liberal" newspaper.

jmcc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121145641#Comment_121145641

Different countries have different legal systems and therefore different liabilities concerning what they publish. That drives some of what the Irish Times does as regards comments. Another aspect is the size of the IT's daily circulation. It is really just a provincial newspaper with aspirations. Prior to Covid, its daily circulation was falling and it may have been selling around 50K copies a day.

On a medium or large sized publication's website, having a comments section and people to maintain it may not be a financial burden. For a small publication like the IT, that would require employees to moderate what would be posted in the comments section. It is quite different to a forum website like Boards.ie. It has a few employees but a lot of voluntary moderators who are not paid. Such a model would not work for a newspaper website in Ireland due to the problem of legal liability over what would be published on the newspaper's website.

There's a wonderful phrase, "midwit", that could be applied to the IT in that collectively it is smarter than average but not by much. The depth of its knowledge on various subjects is often shallow and wrapped in a kind of Dunning-Krugeresque attitude. This would probably apply to many newspapers that fancy themselves as being a cut above the rest. As others have pointed out, the comments sections often showed up the weaknesses of opinions of its columnists. The comments often became more entertaining and better read than the opinion columns. But that's a deeper problem that many newspapers ran into as they tried to cut costs due to losing readers. Most people no longer buy a daily newspaper.

Journalism costs money. Investigative journalism is even more expensive and can take weeks or months before a story is ready for publication. Opinion is cheap and as easily produced. The IT achieved global notoriety for having been fooled with an AI-generated opinion piece recently. Some people will read those opinion pieces to reinforce their own views and others to be outraged. They generate traffic for the newspaper's website and are basically clickbait. Many newspapers, including the Irish Times, became more viewspapers than newspapers for financial reasons.

As for participation, sites like Boards.ie are better and probably have more readers than the IT. You could always dash off a few letters to the editor of the IT or try to get a job there. Both would probably be a waste of time. Forums and Social Media have replaced the comments sections.

Regards...jmcc

greencap

As I understand it there are two definitions of censorship. One is common speech where for example a private enterprise may edit content out, you have to first approach the enterprise they don't come to you.

The other is a legal term where only a government is involved, and they come to you and prevent you from expressing yourself as per your human rights.

I support twitter, IT, or any other enterprise in "censoring" anyone for any reason they so choose as long as its within the law (eg not discriminatory), and in fact they're duty bound by the same legal system to "censor" since if they didn't remove content they'd be spammed to death with adverts, porn, drug deals and other illegal content and activities.

These things kill enterprises, and enterprises are legally bound to their shareholders to maximize profits - and you as a voter are responsible for those same laws being implemented. So no point in first demanding that they 'censor' and then going on to whinge about 'censorship'. Vote in a politician to change the laws or get over it.

Hotblack Desiato

A private enterprise choosing to not publish your content on their behalf is in no way censorship.

If I write what I regard as the novel of the century, but editors at several publishers regard as horrific dreck and refuse to publish it, am I being censored, or critiqued?

The funny thing is that it's never been easier to publish whatever you want. Buy a domain ($10 a year or less), get hosting (similar cost) and off you go. Just remember to have a solicitor on speed dial in case you uncensoredly publish anything someone might regard as libellous or defamatory.

FWIW I regard our current defamation laws as erring far too much on the side of those who would rather things not be published, but they are what they are and we have a system of democracy if enough people want a law to be enacted or changed.

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121147836#Comment_121147836

This is not about the IT refusing to publish some comment. Their online comment facility was moderated and subscriber-only. I had no issue with that. The issue here is that they have removed this facility and made a fake promise to introduce a new system.

That is suppression of speech, public communication, or other information. In a word - censorship.

I won’t waste time on your “buy a website” comment.

Hotblack Desiato

It's not censorship no matter how many times you say it is.

Not having a comment facility is a commercial decision and the probable reasons for this decision have been pointed out several times.

You can publish whatever you want yourself, as I pointed out. You have no right to insist that anyone else publish your content on your behalf. If you are not prepared to put your money where your mouth is then you have to accept that others will have editorial control over what they choose to publish, or not.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121149746#Comment_121149746

It's a word. It's not the word however. And your continued dismissal of the existing Right to Reply is only further suggestion you are determined to bang the censorship drum, logic be damned. Maybe you should email the Letters section and see what happens.

jmcc

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121149746#Comment_121149746

That's a customer service problem not a censorship problem.

Regards...jmcc

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121152462#Comment_121152462

It’s both.

The IT has lost touch with its readers and doesn’t want subscribers’ online reactions criticising its editorial line.

Its campaign against fee-paying schools is just the latest move guaranteed to irritate its core readership. More fundamentally, the IT continues to insist on increased public expenditure in every direction and speaks of tax cuts as a moral failure although the Government aims to spend 100,000,000,000 Euro a year (yeah, €20,000 a year for everyone in the country by 2025) while hitting ordinary workers with over 50% tax on hard-earned income. I could go on….

It is also a form of censorship. Not the worst type by any means but censorship none the less (combined with a phony promise to make amends). I will ignore the Humpty-Dumptys here telling me that “censorship” means exactly what they want it to mean i.e. not something the IT can do.

Seth Brundle

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121153964#Comment_121153964

I could go on….

Mod: Please don't!

If you don't like what you're being told censorship is then that's for you to deal with but I'm ending this part of the discussion now. I guess in a way, I'm censoring this nonsense!

As for your use of "Humpty-Dumptys", play the ball and not the man if you wish to continue posting in this forum. I'd advise having a look at the POLITICS CHARTER AND GUIDELINES again!

Seth Brundle

Mod: @Caquas do not post in this thread again for arguing with a mod decision in a now deleted post

Seth Brundle

Moved to the News & Media forum - please note the FORUM CHARTER: Read before posting