IN the beginning, the technology gods created the Internet and saw that it was good. Here, at last, was a public sphere with unlimited potential for reasoned debate and the thoughtful exchange of ideas, an enlightening conversational bridge across the many geographic, social, cultural, ideological and economic boundaries that ordinarily separate us in life, a way to pay bills without a stamp.

Then someone invented “reader comments” and paradise was lost.

The Web, it should be said, is still a marvelous place for public debate. But when it comes to reading and understanding news stories online — like this one, for example — the medium can have a surprisingly potent effect on the message. Comments from some readers, our research shows, can significantly distort what other readers think was reported in the first place.
------
One possible approach to moderate the nasty effect, of course, is to shut down online reader comments altogether, as some media organizations and bloggers have done. Paul Krugman’s blog post on this newspaper’s Web site on the 10th anniversary of Sept. 11, for instance, simply ended with “I’m not going to allow comments on this post, for obvious reasons.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/03/opinio...tml?hp&_r=1&;

Oh, we understand. No voice of dissention should be allowed if you're a liberal "journalist." Can't be trying to change their opinions with readers comments, even though some of them can get nasty.

OMG What a Ti$$y baby.

" I am so smart no one should be able to disagree with any of my brilliant points."

Quote: The_Nevadan wrote in post #2

---

OMG What a Ti$$y baby.

" I am so smart no one should be able to disagree with any of my brilliant points."

---