Misinformation, disinformation, profanity, bots, and trolls have led some magazines to shutter their comment sections. But are there other options?

By William Dunkerley

"Why We're Shutting Off Our Comments" headlined a 2013 Popular Science article. It proclaimed, "Starting today, PopularScience.com will no longer accept comments on new articles."

The article goes on: "A politically motivated, decades-long war on expertise has eroded the popular consensus on a wide variety of scientifically validated topics." Continuing, it says, "And because comments sections tend to be a grotesque reflection of the media culture surrounding them, the cynical work of undermining bedrock scientific doctrine is now being done beneath our own stories, within a website devoted to championing science."

The Case for Comment Sections

I can understand that editorial viewpoint. In contrast, though, comments are often considered to be a popular feature for readers. The owner of a media chain recently told me that for many people the contents section of a publication is a successful point of entry to its editorial content.

At the beginning of last year, Yes! magazine made an announcement very different from that of Popular Science. Its article was titled "Announcing a Comments Section You’ll Actually Want to Read." The story promised readers:

"Opportunities to go deeper on a story. You’ll be able to chat, ask questions, and get more insight from Yes!. contributors, editors, and sometimes even the story subjects themselves.

"Opportunities to build our issues with us. That’s right, we’re bringing you into the process of creating issues of Yes! magazine. We have a community of some of the greatest forces for good in the world. We want your thoughts, ideas, and feedback.

"Opportunities to provide input on our products. We want you to have a say on your experience reading Yes! What do you like? What could be improved? How can we make the Yes! experience better?

"Great conversations. With Yes! staffers, and hopefully each other. Ultimately, our goal is to create a space that allows us to better partner with each other."

What Our Subscribers Are Saying

We surveyed a few Editors Only subscribers about their experience with reader comments. Here are their comments:

--Michael Hrickiewicz, American Hospital Association: "We belong to an association that runs an online forum. We farm that for anonymous Q&As that we use for a column in the magazine. We believe the column provides interesting content and also promotes the forum."

--Timothy McQuiston, editor, Vermont Business Magazine: "We still carry reader comments. We don't get many, typical of a business publication, and on rare occasions we have to take one down for bad language, etc. It seems some publications in Vermont no longer offer reader comments anymore because of their vile nature. We really don't get any traditional letters to the editor except during campaign time, and we don't run those in print or online anyway."

--Ronda Parag, managing editor, Metro Life Media:" We do not have reader comments in our publications."

--Rachel Grabenhofer, managing editor, Cosmetics & Toiletries: "We carry reader comments generally as 'Letters to the Editor.' They can sometimes run around 1,000 words, but we are a technical B2B trade journal, so sometimes readers need room to explain the opposing view. If we get enough contradiction, in the past we have run an occasional point/counterpoint–style discussion. Longer pieces have made it into print, but these were more than five years ago; print space is now more precious.

"We tend to try to tie any letters to the editor about a given piece to the piece itself, sometimes as a sidebar, so that new readers to the piece will see there has been discussion about it.

"People love to get opinionated and see their voices in print."

--Mark Roseman, publisher, Contemporary Family Magazine: "I am now preparing our premiere issue of Contemporary Family Magazine. It is a new online quarterly for family professionals around the world. We want to have a section for reader comments."

--Isabella Simon, editorial assistant, Commonweal magazine: "Commonweal does accept reader comments. We print a set of them, largely received via email, at the start of every issue, in our 'Letters to the Editor' section."

--Deborah Lockridge, editor-in-chief, Heavy Duty Trucking and Truckinginfo.com: "We do allow reader comments on our online content at Truckinginfo.com. Editors must approve comments before they are posted. Although some readers find this frustrating, we don't want to allow any hate speech, personal attacks, conspiracy theories, spam, or comments that are really off-topic. Mild profanity is allowed if a comment is otherwise relevant. We try to answer reader questions that appear there when we are able, but as our staff has been cut the past year, that doesn't happen as often as it used to.

"We long ago dropped our 'Letters to the Editors' column in print. We just weren't getting that many, although we did supplement them with comments from the website. And with shrinking print pages, we felt we would rather devote that space to original content."

--Gary Crowdus, editor-in-chief, Cineaste magazine: "We make a serious effort to maintain at least one page of 'Letters to the Editor' in each issue -- we try to include reader comments and feedback in our print issue, and in years past we've even had to print spillover of such comments on our website. Our present website does not enable us to post reader comments or have a 'chat room' feature.

"In recent years, during the rise of The Age of the Internet, when people are more used to sending brief messages via Twitter, we have bemoaned in our pages the 'Dying Art of the Letter to the Editor.'

"Apart from the fact that we think a two-way flow of communication between our readers and our contributors is an important feature of our effort as a magazine of journalism and criticism on the cinema, many of our readers have advised us that the 'Letters' page is the first page they check out in each new issue, since they've said that's where they expect some of the most fascinating commentary -- or, as one reader advised, 'That's where the critical feathers really fly.'"

To Shut Off or Not to Shut Off

So we have quite a dichotomy. Many editors believe that reader comments are an editorial asset. Others are turning them off. Other than Popular Science we've not cited the many shutoff notices. But you can find lots if you Google "no more reader comments."

Low-quality comments, political misinformation, inappropriate language, bots, and trolls seem to be motivating factors. They come part and parcel with an unmoderated comments section. But moderating presents an editorial burden that many editorial departments want no part of. It's easy to sympathize with that. But an in-house distaste for reader comments isn't the only factor that should be considered.

It's hard to refute that reader comments are generally an attractive feature. It seems to me it would be prudent to explore alternative ways of handling the attendant problems.

Tablet magazine came up with one idea that's worth exploring: levying a nominal charge for posting a comment. That would eliminate a lot of clutter and whittle down the editorial burden associated with comments. Restricting comments to logged-in registered subscribers is another alternative. There are probably other approaches, too.

If you've had thoughts of curtailing reader comments, I recommend weighing the pluses and minuses. The value of an attractive feature, implemented with care, may turn out to be worth its expense in editorial time.

William Dunkerley is principal of William Dunkerley Publishing Consultants, www.publishinghelp.com.

Add your comment.