Thank you for your article explaining the reasons for eliminating the comments section on Noozhawk. I’m sure you’ll hear negative responses, though they are most likely to be from those couple dozen regular commentators you mention. I doubt they will be so willing as to give away their anonymity in defense of their crooked interpretation of the First Amendment.
Their argument may be to the tune of what you alluded to and likely anticipate that you are hereby eliminating your readers’ rights to free speech and exercising prior restraint. Don’t pay attention to that garbage, it’s irrelevant in the end.
You make perfect points:
» Just because you can say anything doesn’t mean you should.
» People who commented were not constructive — often spreading false claims, harassing other commentators and being downright hateful.
» A majority of readers don’t leave comments (mostly due to the vitriolic and toxic forum that it was).
While I appreciated the ability to view the comments at one’s own discretion, in the event I ever chose to, I was always disappointed. Unfortunately it did not change the dynamic.
I agree with your decision and will take it as a wonderful New Year’s gift. Overall, what I really want to say is “thank you” to and your staff for your collective commitment to ethical journalism. I work in local government, and we rely upon quality news sources like yours to keep us up-to-date with the latest information about our community.
I appreciate what you all do at Noozhawk. Keep up the good work.
Michael T. Daly
Santa Barbara
• • •
It is your news site, with stories reported. Readers can select, or not, specific stories on a wide variety of topics.
Letters to the editor sounds like an excellent plan, in lieu of comments. Sounds like a glass of wine would be appropriate while screening them, select the most literate and constructively written. Personally, I read for the varied news stories of the day or week, comments can become too out of date, take too long of their own spin — not why I read Noozhawk.
No reason to descend to nonconstructive levels of communication on any subject.
Thanks for the Noozhawk option for local news plus some nonlocal.
Joanne Horton
Santa Barbara
• • •
I can easily understand you decision to cut off reader comments despite freedom of speech being critical to our society.
Winston Churchill said “The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with a voter.”
Thank you and the best of luck going forward.
Matt Cheresh
Santa Barbara
• • •
I cannot tell you how delighted I am that you have braved the divide of civil discourse over the bite-and-run actions of the few racist, hateful commenters in your reader comments.
It was always so predictable the stories they would comment on and the things they would say. Often it was hard to read the vile racists rants from those same people day after day. Good riddance to them and good job Noozhawk!!
This is a wonderful first step to the return of respectful people taking responsibility for their thoughts and actions.
Jenny Marshall
Santa Barbara
• • •
I understand your decision to stop publishing comments. Although some were unpleasantly snarky, they sure were entertaining.
Scott Brittingham
Santa Barbara
• • •
I just wanted to give you strong positive feedback on your new policy regarding reader responses.
I also believe in the ideal of free speech to express one’s valid opinions. However, I have been very disturbed by the lack of professionalism in many (if not most) of the online “reader comments” that Noozhawk readers have been expressing. Readers have been using that platform to spout unbacked opinions and very childish comments. I personally gave up commenting on serious issues because the level of interaction on that platform had become so juvenile.
I applaud the Noozhawk staff for having the courage to put a halt to these silly and often and inflammatory comments, while giving many options for valid input with your new “Making the Nooz,” “Public Newsroom” and “Letter to the Editor” policies.
Fran Finney
Santa Barbara
• • •
Noozhawk management recently announced total prohibition of reader comments.
The frustration of Noozhawk as to what this previously enabled feature had become is certainly understandable. Especially notable in recent months was the almost psychopathic insistence of some commenters to post, re-post and re-re-post on every topic — nonstop for many hours of the day — apparently in an effort to dominate others by always having the “last word.”
Even should no other problems have existed — and plenty did — the practices of these people would be enough to drive away many and to disgust otherwise tolerant administrators. In my opinion, these discourteous obsessives, in particular, helped drive the final nail in the coffin of Noozhawk’s decision.
My experience however, since buying my first computer in 1985, has been that permitting anonymous opinion without oversight inevitably and always throws open the door to a flood of the nastiest, most cowardly expressions of men and women. The vast majority readily say anything obnoxious as long as they can’t be identified.
I vividly remember a newsgroup devoted to “Pianos: Brand Quality, Brand Availability, Sales Practices, etc.” that became such a hotbed of viciousness many interested people fled the scene. Only moderated newsgroups, that filtered comments, survived and prospered among intelligent and reasonable people.
If, as publisher Macfadyen reasonably asserts, Noozhawk’s small staff was overwhelmed by the need to monitor endless reader nastiness, no one can blame the publication for eliminating permission for these contributions.
The loss of this public participation, however, is not trivial. And in my view Noozhawk’s increasingly expanded list of suppressed topics has not always been necessary or wise. Over time, discussions of national, regional, state or even county policies that impact directly on Santa Barbarans were not published. Even small-staff justification did not quite explain the degree of harshness.
Additionally, the publication’s current adaptation of its comment policy is not as open, generous or “democratic” as it could and should be. Even the more stringently staffed Edhat publishes “monitored” Op-Ed contributions from readers. Noozhawk should not confine reasoned opinion pieces to sanctioned columnists or inevitably assign them to abbbreviated “Letters to the Editor” status.
And finally, I would like to see Noozhawk change its practice of suppressing comment critical of its policies. We see headlines when readers like what the online paper is doing. Contrasting opinions rarely appear.
William Smithers
Santa Barbara
• • •
Just read Barry Punzal’s article on the death of George Rempe. A great loss to me personally and, more important, to the community in Santa Barbara and beyond.
I met George back in 1984 when I was maybe 13 or 14 years old and he was my coach. Played with his son, Michael, through high school and stayed in touch ever since. First through my days at UCSB and then my many trips back to Santa Barbara after moving to the East Coast for law school in 1993.
I cannot count how many ways he helped me over the years — whether with career choices, relationship advice, coping with 9/11 (I was in Manhattan) and on and on. Ultimately, I consider him a best friend.
Now I’m 47 and it’s hard to believe he’s gone. We were just texting about the Thomas Fire a few days ago.
Of course, I enjoyed the George-isms in your article and here is another, my all-time favorite and something I’ve thought about almost every day of my life:
“Whatever you do in life really do it. You don’t want to be the older guy at the bar thinking you know I wish I would have done this or that when I had the chance. Study hard, work hard and keep at it. Whatever you decide to do, I guarantee you’ll achieve more than you thought you could and you won’t regret it.”
George was one of the greats, to me what an actual hero looks like. Thank you for the article and Godspeed to George and his family.
Thomas C. Singher
Stamford, Conn.
• • •
I have a couple of ideas to help our local economy in regards to the recent tragic Thomas Fire …
My suggestion for the local economy is to have a Holiday Re-Do, on Feb. 25 as an example. This gives all the businesses, companies, nonprofits, clubs and individuals an opportunity to RE-DO their parties and events that were canceled due to the Thomas Fire.
This will help the local economy and bring some fun to the fairly quiet winter season. By having this in February, it gives everyone time to re-plan their events, send invitations, engage venues and caterers, etc.
Gifts can be part of the fun, even to donate to charity …
Let’s spread this idea!
One more idea is for landlords of commercial space to forgive a month of rent for local businesses affected by loss of business due to the fire. If they can’t afford a full month of rent, how about a partial reduction?
Spread the word.
Karen Lehrer
Santa Barbara
• • •
Mail Calls
Noozhawk welcomes and encourages expressions of all views on Santa Barbara County issues. Letters should be brief, and each must include a valid mailing address and contact information. Pseudonyms will not be used.
By submitting any content to Noozhawk, you warrant that the material is your original expression, free of plagiarism, and does not violate any copyright, proprietary, contract or personal right of anyone else. Noozhawk reserves, at our sole discretion, the right to choose not to publish a submission.
Click here for Noozhawk’s Terms of Use, and click here for more information about how to submit letters to the editor and other announcements, tips and stories.