January 20, 2006


Paper Closes Reader Comments on Blog, Citing Vitriol (KATHARINE Q. SEELYE, 1/20/06, NY Times)

The Washington Post stopped accepting reader comments on one of its blogs yesterday, saying it had drawn too many personal attacks, profanity and hate mail directed at the paper's ombudsman.

The closing was the second time in recent months that a major newspaper has stopped accepting feedback from readers in a Web forum. An experiment in allowing the public to edit editorials in The Los Angeles Times lasted just two days in June before it was shut because pornographic material was being posted on the site.

The Post's blog, which had accepted comments from readers on its entries since it was first published on Nov. 21, stopped doing so indefinitely yesterday afternoon with a notice from Jim Brady, executive editor of www.washingtonpost.com.

Mr. Brady wrote that he had expected criticism of The Post on the site, but that the public had violated rules against personal attacks and profanity.

We're thankful to all of you that we very seldom experience such problems here.

Posted by Orrin Judd at January 20, 2006 1:27 PM

The article doesn't label the comments as rightwing ravings, so by default they were leftwing ravings which are typically rife with profanity.

The moonbats are upset because the ombudsman was pointing out errors in the Times reporting and that Abramoff gave money to Dems as well as Republicans.

Posted by: erp at January 20, 2006 1:49 PM

I've always been impressed with the quality of comments (and the commenters) on this blog, as opposed to others I frequent. It's lovely to read, and sometimes participate in, spirited debates with people who don't need to call their opponents poopyheads to make a point. :)

Posted by: sharon at January 20, 2006 3:25 PM

erp - Right you are. The lefties were upset that the paper's ombudsman had written that that several Democrats "have gotten Abramoff campaign money."

Posted by: pj at January 20, 2006 4:12 PM

I agree with sharon. I read this blog daily but seldom comment. I have the impression that readers here are overall smarter and more attuned with the real World. This is one of the few sites where a person can go and actually learn things, and enjoy doing it, hence ranting, raving and stark profanity have to place.

Posted by: Tom Wall at January 20, 2006 4:13 PM

the lefty moonbats are life's losers, and have a lot of free floating anger about the "unfairness" of it all. once they accept their future is in retail, they will feel better and get on with things. until then they are going to continue throwing public tantrums, and soiling themselves.

Posted by: toe at January 20, 2006 5:01 PM


Posted by: ghostcat at January 20, 2006 5:19 PM


I resemble that remark.

Posted by: ratbert at January 20, 2006 5:23 PM

The WP doesn't have any problem dishing out personal attacks.

Posted by: Sandy P at January 20, 2006 5:33 PM

If only Bart were still here.............

Posted by: ed at January 20, 2006 7:53 PM

bart left due to his bart-centric nature.

He couldn't moderate his contempt for non-bartlike peoples in his comments, and got tired of the blog's Powers That Be censoring his posts.

He was very funny, but ultimately not emotionally an adult.

Posted by: Michael Herdegen [TypeKey Profile Page] at January 21, 2006 2:50 AM

Indeed, Bart proves the point--he was funny because of his racism and other hatreds and because it was so easy to laugh at a fat loser who thought he was better than other people.

Posted by: oj at January 21, 2006 8:04 AM