A panel discussion on “the economics of media” at the Louisiana Endowment for the Humanities tonight was dominated by a spirited back and forth about “racist” comments on the Times-Picayune’s nola.com website:
Horne, who for the sake of full disclosure is now a board member at The Lens, where I work, raised the issue about half way through the 90-minute discussion, after a discussion of the internet’s impact on the news business. Comments that follow articles, he said, aren’t exactly a boon to the spirit of journalism.
“The commentary that trails news articles, in many ways is deeply repugnant, much of it racist in pretty overt ways,” Horne said. “I’m left to wonder if it hasn’t besmirched the whole enterprise.”
Kovacs addressed the issue later on.
“Whatever ugliness there is online is no different from the majority of the stuff published anonymously over the years,” Kovacs said — having given a history of American newspapering that included anonymous pamphlets in the early 20th century. “America is a pretty self-correcting place, and ugliness and bad ideas collapse under their own weight.”
“I don’t think the industry was prepared for the negativity of some of these comments,” Kovacs continued. “And various efforts have been made to try to tone it down, to monitor, to cut down on this stuff. Some websites are asking people for their names, although I don’t know what good that does because I don’t know how you could stop me from saying I’m Jed Horne.”
Horne responded.
“Actually the real absence is, where are the readers who are a counter-force? Why are we not more regularly seeing that ugly element shouted down?” Horne asked. “Perhaps we’re smug in the assumption that we’ll prevail, but there’s a remarkable lack of the full gamut of opinion.”
Plenty of readers are holding the Times-Picayune accountable for the nature of its comments by stopping reading it, activist attorney Tracie Washington said, from the audience.
“I think newspapers are conscious of the fact that ugly commenting is bad for business,” Kovacs said.
Audience member Jacques Morial, activist attorney and son of the city’s first black mayor, asked Kovacs a question to follow up on that.
“Has there ever been a discussion about the ethics of profiteering off racial strife and bigotry, especially given that the Times-Picayune does promote the most commented story, so that people click through, and it rings their cash register?” Morial asked.
Kovacs said it’s unlikely that the paper will get rid of comments.
“If newspapers didn’t do it, somebody else would do it,” he said. “And if there’s one thing that newspapers have learned over the years it’s that surrendering lines of business to other people is a way to become extinct.”
Afterward, Morial confronted Kovacs at the back of the room. “You didn’t answer my question,” he said.
“There have been plenty of discussions about these comments,” Kovacs said, adding that ethical discussions take place all the time. But there hasn’t been a specific discussion along the lines Morial had asked about, Kovacs said.
As someone who finds most of the comments you find after news articles disgusting, I think the problem is that many of us are actually afraid of inciting someone in the comments who disagrees with us.
I personally like some of the methods you see now days where readers can promotes or demote certain comments. There all there, but you can let people know you agree or disagree without starting an argument.
Kovacs is being disingenuous. If America is a pretty self-correcting place, I haven’t heard it on talk radio or seen it in the comments at Nola.com. More to the point, the comments section at Nola.com isn’t “America” — it’s a website where they have the control, and what they choose to allow says more about them than it does about the commenters.
This philosophical “if we don’t do it, someone else will” attitude is particularly cynical. Sure, there’s always going to be a market for racism and homophobia, but do you really want to traffic in that because the Web is full of other sewers?
As Red Cotton has pointed out, Nell Nolan’s social column is never posted with comments available, because the Uptown swells would raise holy hell if the Nola.com commenters came in and defecated all over the comments section the way they do on other articles. I’d love to see that laissez-faire, “self-correcting” attitude applied to the social section as blithely as it’s applied to Central City murders and political stories.
And you can sign my name to this all you like: Kevin Allman.
I don’t know what all the confusion is. Let’s not be naive; it’s a matter of economics. Look at who still subscribes to the Times-Pic, the newspaper that endorses Vitter: most of the people wh PAY for the actual print newspaper are aging, fearful white-flight conservatives who live in JP or across the lake. The Times-Picayune has a vested interest in flattering their prejudices and providing its paying readership with stories that reassure their opinions of “thug” New Orleans.
Why, when a 40-year-old black man is shot to death, does the Times-Pic dig into the court records and report that he had a marijuana possession charge 20 years ago? They don’t do that when a white person dies. Well, it’s just part of how they shape the narrative.
Their dwindling subscription base and advertisers need to have their prejudices reinforced. The market demands, the Times-Pic supplies. It’s not REALLY about race, only about money. I guarantee you The Gambit wouldn’t stay in business writing stories that pissed off its core readership either.
You know what you are getting with the TP. It’s amazing how often they will not post a photo if a white person commits a crime. If it’s a black person, they will have every freaking picture from kindergarten on up accompanying the article. The comments on the site are sickening to say the least and it makes me wonder…
Is this a loud, small, vocal group content to hide behind semi-anonymity or are those comments the predominant thoughts of folks in the area?
I’m so glad you posted this article. The comments on TP are totally out of control. To simply say everyone is doing it is a slap in the face to corporate responsibility. Furthermore, the comments section gives a voice to minority opinions without giving that same voice to others, because no person in their right mind is going to spend their day negating ignorance on TP’s website. Why should I waste my time trying to fight with someone who won’t even identify themselves.
Lastly, there are plenty of sites that don’t allow comments and are still financially stable. Maybe the TP needs to take a look at its business model if they are having financial problems and change the way they do business.
Pingback: Eliminating “nasty” comments | Matt Davis: Journalist