Irish Times website no longer allowing comments

iffandonlyif

It seems commenting under articles won’t be possible anymore after a website redesign. There were a lot of cranks down there, but I enjoyed being able to give my opinion and gauge others’.

Threadbanned users:

growleaves

Ubbquittious

It is happening all over, there is a big move towards online censorship in the past few years, all in the name of preventing trolls and what have you but really it is to suppress dissenting opinions. The Journal got a handout from the EU to promote climate alarmism and they are also very quick to ban people now

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119121487#Comment_119121487

This sounds like a conspiracy theory. Do you have any evidence?

Sleeper12

The problem is that people think that they are on twitter, Facebook etc every time they post something. They say things that they most likely wouldn't say in real life. I gave up looking at the comment section years ago

pixelburp

Newspapers have always had a curated outlet for public feedback, it was the Letters section. And remains to this day with the Irish Times. Obviously at the whim of the editor but it is there, allowing for opinion and feedback. Censorship seems like hyperbole, or recency bias maybe at a pinch.

Comments on newspaper websites was always a naive idea because it was an open door for extremists and wingnuts ranting at worst, at best offering nothing more than generic "feck the gubberment" snark. And thanks to the whole upvote/downvote system in some places, half the time the top comment was some inane joke. See the journal for a parade of armchair comedians.

As the cartoonist Twisteddoodles once sarcastically remarked, "having read some journalism, why not read the complete opposite of that?"

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/

growleaves

I thought the comments on the IT web site were in general much sharper than the Letters to the Editor. It's rare that a letter printed in the Irish Times displays any wit or discernment.

StupidLikeAFox

News comment sections rarely get more insightful than "mehole martin should be locked up" - absolute cesspits the lot of them

This is how I picture most lads who leave comments on news stories:

Ubbquittious

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

It is a conspiracy theory. The increase in censorship is all around us though. It's such a change from the 'Wild West' days of the internet with unmoderated USENET groups and what have you

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119125437#Comment_119125437

So, you have no evidence.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119123549#Comment_119123549

That may be so, but can only imagine the work needed to moderate the trolls and bad faith merchants. If it's anything like Boards then to be fair the obvious question in the Irish Times becomes "why bother?".

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119125437#Comment_119125437

Censorship is state control, by definition; newspapers are private enterprise so they're entitled to dictate their user engagement. And as pointed out, they have had that for decades with Letters. And given the heavy editorial policy of tabloids in particular, shuttering comments sections is small potatoes in regards to opinions that are publicised. In any case, the Wild West was a time of lawless chaos, if we run with the metaphor. Why would that be something celebrated, or desired? Comments sections on websites are hot garbage, Christ Boards is barely one step above it, still requires moderation.

pixelburp

And just to prove the point about the standard of comment expected from a news site: thejournal has an article about he first case of monkeypox here; the top rated comment(s)?

Gimme a break. This is not some bastion of free speech and peerless debate of the masses being lost (obviously it's the Irish Times being discussed, not journal)

DarkJager21

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119125919#Comment_119125919

The Journal is the drizzling **** when it comes to open comments - watch what happens when they let one of the trans lobby take the soapboax to rebuke everyone with guff that has more logic holes than a Swiss cheese, but you have no recourse - the weirdo has spoken now be quiet. Comments always are closed and they won't even post the article on Facebook because they know exactly what the reaction will be. An absolute shitstain of a site parading as journalism.

SuperBowserWorld

The Irish times letters page was always something like an Enid Blyton fan club letters page.

Dear Sir,

Julian was having a simply frightful time with some Irish builders. They'd put in the wrong coloured door! Unbelievable.

Yours etc,

Timmy the dog

Loafing Oaf

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

Noticed that with Breda O'Brien's piece today. They often turn of the comments if it's guest columnist or about a legal issue or something but I'd never seen Breda's screeds cut off before. I do like to look at the feedback but I can understand why the IT decided it's not worth the hassle.

Edit: apparently comments

will return in the near future for subscribers.

https://www.irishtimes.com/media/2022/05/23/the-irish-times-unveils-redesigned-website-and-app/

gipi

This is what the IT said in their article on Wednesday, introducing the new website -

On-site functionality allowing readers to comment on selected articles has been under review and will return in the near future for subscribers

https://www.irishtimes.com/media/2022/05/23/the-irish-times-unveils-redesigned-website-and-app/

CPTM

Oooh, funnily enough that would encourage me to subscribe and actually look at the comments section. I feel like a lot of trolls would be weeded out by the subscription fee.. interesting.. I must look at the subscription fee.

fly_agaric

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119126296#Comment_119126296

The subscription fee is probably not going to keep out those (real or automated somehow?) that are being funded to go about their work.

It's good Irish Times closed it and that it might be more restricted/controlled if it comes back again. Not much of value is being lost from what I've seen. Warning - May contain Nuts.

Strumms

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119122701#Comment_119122701

I’d rather I had the ability to read something which I vehemently disagreed with and the ability aim a retort then have the option removed altogether.

problem for the site probably with life being id say at an all time controversial setting with the Ukrainians coming to enjoy our benefits, services, security, cash and accommodation plus. , Covid and everything that entails…. There will be undoubtedly certain passionate responses….from both sides of these and other debates… that might require a certain level of moderation which The Times might be unwilling to facilitate as it might alienate certain clients..

from the Times website…

• In pursuance of the foregoing and to enable readers of The Irish Times to reach informed and independent judgements and to contribute more effectively to the life of the community, the following principles govern the publication of The Irish Times: news shall be as accurate and as comprehensive as is practicable and be presented fairly; comment and opinion shall be informed and responsible, and shall be identifiable from fact; and special consideration shall be given to the reasonable representation of minority interests and divergent views.
• We welcome readers’ views - be it to the Letters to the Editor page; by letter, email or fax. We encourage readers’ participation by way of user generated content, social media posting or comment at the end of an article through irishtimes.com. Readers can also express their views by way of postal or telephoned response to The Irish Times.

they encourage reader participation ? Really ? Might as well change the URL to spoofdotcom.

awec

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119126364#Comment_119126364

The problem for the site was the comments were a pile of shite, mostly from oddballs who had nothing worthwhile to offer. Meaningful public engagement they certainly were not, they were an echo chamber for trolls and dullards who would literally manipulate anything into something to criticise the government for, or criticise Ireland for, or both together!

What I have come to learn is there are a lot of people in Ireland who seem to really enjoy talking about how terrible their country is on the internet. I am not sure I am aware of any other nation whose population will engage so enthusiastically in self-deprecation.

CrabRevolution

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119126364#Comment_119126364

The comment sections never resemble anything like the idealised discourse you describe though, where there's well argued points that I may disagree with. It's a moronic cesspit of posts with nothing worthwhile to add.

You could programme a bot to just post the same statement under every article insulting the greens, politicians, the government, the EU etc. and it would utterly hoover up likes.

Snickers Man

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119125556#Comment_119125556

One of the ways the Irish Times "moderated the trolls and bad faith merchants" was to make commenting on its website contingent with having a subscription to the service. So it would at least have known, or had genuine e-mail addresses (and bank or credit card details) for anyone posting on their site. Twitter it certainly was not.

MrMusician18

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119126274#Comment_119126274

I wonder will it be the same near future that boards.ie is operating in when it comes to the return of old features

MrMusician18

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119149859#Comment_119149859

Without below the line, the scutter that's often above the line gets presented as a societal fact, or the correct opinion to hold.

Comments are good.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119150456#Comment_119150456

A newspaper's editorial policy isn't offset by reams of inane comments amounting to low-effort variations of Fúck the Government/EU/UK/Sinn Fein/etc. etc. Whatever you think amounts to "societal fact" I've read the same rubbish in the Comments sections of the Daily Mail, Telegraph, TheJournal, and so on. The "wisdom" of the crowd seems undimmed by ideological leaning. It's no bulwark

CrabRevolution

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119150456#Comment_119150456

Again, you're presenting some ideal that doesn't bear any resemblance to reality. Comment sections aren't full of relevant articulate counterpoints to the topic contained in the article. They're just endless iterations of "government bad".

MrMusician18

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119150671#Comment_119150671

They are not all, but some are.

The Guardian generally has a good comments section for example.

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119125437#Comment_119125437

Reading usenet back in the day was - with a few exceptions - like trying to pan for gold in a sewer pipe.

Censorship my... foot. Nobody is or can be obligated to publish your opinion on your behalf. If you want to use someone else's platform you're playing by their rules. Boards deleting your comment or banning you is no more censorship than a newspaper making a decision on how to run its BTL comments or to have them at all is.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119150456#Comment_119150456

Especially when the IT is giving its weekly soapbox to Breda O'Brien or the odious Maria Steen.

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119204208#Comment_119204208

The IT has every right to exclude comments in its new website just as its subscribers have every right to cancel their subscriptions but it is a sad day for public debate in this country. I don’t think any of our major media have comment sections now. That is censorship, even if you think it justified because many of the comments should not be published.

Do people actually write letters to the Editor? With a €1.25 postage stamp and all?

Good news for Boards. Where else to vent after reading nonsense in the major media?

elperello

It's not the job of the IT to provide a platform for people to "vent".

Not providing a platform to anyone is not censorship.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119247196#Comment_119247196

Most letters now would arrive by email, many from abroad.

Not necessarily good news for Boards if it becomes a haven for "venters".

Where do we go after reading nonsense on Boards?

(Just for clarity I'm not suggesting that your post is nonsense)

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119247196#Comment_119247196

You have heard of email? lettersed@irishtimes.com

Nice try but I didn't say that many of the comments should not be published.

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119247310#Comment_119247310

As I said, the IT has every right to shut down its comment section. But it is a form of censorship. Not State or official censorship, not ecclesiastical censorship but it is a form of censorship in this digital era which all our major media have decided upon i.e. to shut down a channel for public comment.

Is this censorship justified? Perhaps, but could the IT not have exercised a more judicious control of these comments? It seemed to me that they were allowing more outrageous comments in recent months, and from the same few posters.

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119247310#Comment_119247310

I was being facetious about postage- obviously the “letters to the Editor” these days are actually emails.

Why are these emails published under this anachronistic rubric when the comments section has been shut down? Presumably because the Editor has complete control of their publication. And they are not anonymous.

I vent on Boards without being abusive.

Hotblack Desiato

It's not censorship. Neither the Irish TImes nor anyone else is obliged to give anyone a platform for their views. They did say comments would return in time, we'll see.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119247933#Comment_119247933

Leaving aside the issue that censorship is only at the state level, regardless how one decides to interpret it; why is any media outlet obliged to maintain an open forum to the public?

The public has an entire industry dedicated to an outpouring of unfiltered opinion via social media - it's not like the shuttering of the Irish Times represents the last redoubt falling here. People can, and do, air their opinions and if anything, Twitter has more People Power and relevance than the IT's avenue for polemical brainfarts.

And also, if the newspaper has "every right" to close their comments sections, how can it also be a form of censorship? It can't be both here, it's a contradictory situation. They have the right to censor?

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119248807#Comment_119248807

Censorship is only at the State level? You absolve the Catholic Church (and all other religions) of censorship - that’s novel!

How many times do I have to repeat that the IT has no obligation to maintain a comment section - but let’s not pretend that this isn’t censorship, even if there are other avenues for comment like Boards. There is no comparison between a comment on the IT website calling out the BS we get from certain commentators (insert names here) and a post on Boards which is only seen by Boardsies.

Will the Commission on the Future of the Media reflect on this? Of course it should but it won’t. It would be rich if the Commission proposes to give taxpayers funds to media which deny the average punter their say.

Oh yeah, RTE.

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119247957#Comment_119247957

I didn't realise you were being facetious. (by the way see how easy it is to be misunderstood in online comment).

You might characterise it as anachronistic others might say it is tradition.

As I said earlier this is not personal.

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119247933#Comment_119247933

You are saying that it is a form of censorship to which the IT is entitled ?

In my opinion the actions of the IT do not fall within any definition of censorship.

The job of the Fourth Estate is difficult enough without them being accused of the very thing they work against.

boombang

They don't tweet every story, but you can tweet in response to most. Not that Twitter is a solution to anything really.

I noticed that they tended not offer comments on their stories that were right on BS, such as anything written by Kitty Holland. I think they know those would be torn to shreds and didn't want the scrutiny.

Hotblack Desiato

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119249586#Comment_119249586

FFS

I post it again, it might sink in

It's not censorship. Neither the Irish TImes nor anyone else is obliged to give anyone a platform for their views. 

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119249586#Comment_119249586

I'm not absolving any religion of anything; because apart from being complete whataboutery and nothing to do with what we were taking about, censorship only pertains to the state apparatus or institutions therein. Often specific to media, or media gatekeeping.

Unless a newspaper was state owned, then a private paper literally cannot "censor". It can editorialise, and as we see with the more aggressive Redtops, will do so with gusto. Is that also censorship to your mind, if news is reported with an intentional slant (often by way of misleading information?) Beyond some vaguely defined sense of objectivity?

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119249735#Comment_119249735

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119249735#Comment_119249735

How many times must I repeat myself!? No one here is arguing that the IT (or any other media) is obliged to have a comments section.

But when the IT chose to shut down its comments section, that's a form of digital censorship. Maybe you would like a less pejorative term but whatever way you look at it, the IT has chosen to restrict the expression of other viewpoints. It has done so legally and openly and without infringing anyone else's constitutional, legal or natural rights but it is still a restriction on free speech. And well beyond what would be needed to prevent e.g. online abuse.

Boards is a good example of a platform for respectful free speech. I hope Boardsies would be among the first to recognise when free speech is being resricted. I call that censorshhip. Why not?

Hotblack Desiato

Boards can, and frequently does, edit or delete posts and ban posters. Is that censorship? Hundreds of "fight da powa" threads in Help Desk say no.

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119251966#Comment_119251966

Yes, Boards censors posts on this site and I totally approve.

There are limits to free speech and Boards generally shows good judgement in dealing with posts in accordance with its own rules which are set out in its terms of use to which all posters have agreed.

If only the mainstream media, including the IT, were not abandoning this approach in favour of a total blackout on readers' comments (except for the anachronism of "Letters to the Editor", which rarely respond to the Opinion pieces that used to attract most comments).

And it's sad to see posters here who don't even recognise the problem.

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119249907#Comment_119249907

In no way was my response "whataboutery" (which must be the most abused and misunderstood term in Irish discussions).

If, as you claim, censorship is limited to the state apparatus, then you are absolving all religious organisations, most obviously the Catholic Church, of censorship. You would also exempt the digital media e.g. Twitter or Facebook when they ban certain posters. Perhaps you have a better word for actions to restrict freedom of speech?

No one reading my posts could possibly think that I regard editoralising, however aggressive or slanted, as censorship? Whether the newspaper is controlled by Rupert Murdoch or Xi Jinping.

CrabRevolution

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119251283#Comment_119251283

If I sent you a letter demanding that you post to your own twitter/facebook/linkedin account a paragraph detailing the breakfast I had this morning, I take it you'd do it without hesitation? If you refused you'd be censoring me and restricting my freedom of speech, the same way the IT is apparently "censoring" commenters.

circadian

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119121487#Comment_119121487

What's climate alarmism? Why would the EU pay The Journal for anything? Have you any evidence of any of this?

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119261101#Comment_119261101

I’ll make this simple - if someone kept posting nonsense on my twitterfeed, I would block them. They might complain that I was censoring them and that would be true but I would be justified in that case. If I blocked all comments from the whole world, that would be paranoid and difficult to justify. It would also be more analogous to the IT cancellation of its comment section.

Of course, my point is that the mainstream media, with a dominant position in the public sphere, have a responsibility to offer a right of reply which they clearly want to restrict I.e. censor.

elperello

The IT does offer a right of reply if a person disputes anything they publish about them and can prove it is incorrect.

See today's letter from Terry Prone in IT today.

Corrections of fact are published regularly.

Closing comments is a different thing.

Caquas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119264606#Comment_119264606

The IT has chosen to restrict its readers’ capacity to respond on its website. Of course, they can pay a solicitor to issue a writ or go to the Press Council or even write a “Letter to the Editor”.

As you say, not the same thing.

elperello

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119264652#Comment_119264652

Well we are in agreement about that anyway.

I still don't think it's censorship to stop "Mr Angry" from having his say on the topics of the day.

Caquas

Posters

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119264683#Comment_119264683

Posters here don’t like the word “censorship” for shutting down online comments but haven’t offered a better word.

Maybe because they generally dislike official censorship and find it hard to apply any such concept to the digital media. If the government had come along and instructed the media to shut down their comment sections, there would have been uproar but somehow it’s OK if the media as a whole (including the public service broadcaster) do it for their own reasons.

Is there a more acceptable word for restrictions on speech? “Ban” is useful for specific instances (and beloved of the tabloids!) but is it better here? e.g. would you prefer “the IT banned all comments on its website”.

This thread’s title is too obsequious - “no longer allowing”. How gracious of the IT to have tolerated their readers’ views for so long!