From the March 5, 2008 Mining Journal Article:
“Some Mining Journal readers have no doubt taken note that as of Monday our Internet edition no longer offers a readership comment option at the end of each story. The Journal felt compelled to withdraw the comment option as the result of abuse by a small minority of readers.”
The Mining Journal should be commended for attempting to host a non-mediated forum for the public to discuss stories covered by the newspaper. It is unfortunate that the public discussion deteriorated into name-calling, bullying and the like. Perhaps, this was a consequence of not requiring user’s real names. Anonymity has its benefits, but it also allows internet user’s to behave in a manner they would be ashamed of if their identity was known. This website encourages discussion of topics covered in the website, but the organization has opted to moderate the comments to weed out inappropriate conduct. It is a fine line to between freedom of speech and providing a platform for disgusting behavior and hate-mongering. I hope that citizens will continue to engage each other on controversial issues, but in person. It develops community, thoughtful and polite debate and maybe even friendship.
One has to ask-were the “small” minority of writers actually those against the mine and vis a vis, against the Mining Journal’s editorial bent?
You can however still comment on newstories on Marquette County’s TV station’s website:
http://www.WLUC-TV6.com
I would suggest that we continue to do so.
(They have recently put together a collection of all the articles and readers’ commentaries which can be searched and read–this includes articles from about one-year ago.)
stimulating and informative, but would participate in something more on this topic?