There's been an on-and-off again debate about reader comments, how to manage them, whether real names should be required, should there be moderation and more. Comments have been generally supported as allowing reader interactivity or participation and (buzzwords of buzzwords) increasing engagement.
The New York Times is even promoting them at times to the front page of the Web site.
But are they generally bad for business?
The New York Times is even promoting them at times to the front page of the Web site.
But are they generally bad for business?
ShareThis; "Christmas Treats")
; "David Carr of the New York Times")
; "FLDemocracy2012.com")
; "4178265189_4785cf3fa5.jpg")
; "9-22-11-2.png")
; "markgalsergplus.jpg")
; "IMG_0520.JPG")
; "Knox County Cell Calls on AT&T")
; "Bonnaroo 2011")
; "Sourcing Stories")
Google+
Hey, Jack.
Your post got me thinking about how similar education and journalism are in terms of their discomfort with the volatility and unpredictability of blogs, comments, and user- (or, in the case of education, student/teacher-) generated content. In fact, word for word, your post could have appeared on any number of edublogs I read regularly, as the issue is of concern to a number of teachers and administrators who are trying to come to terms with how to effectively and ethically integrate these new interactive tools into classroom practice and school culture.
I guess all institutions are grappling with the new web landscape, not just journalists and educators.
I wrote a little (well, a lot, actually) about this in my blog last spring after I unveiled a teen publishing website to a rather tepid reception. Some teachers just get queasy thinking about the ramifications of allowing young people to cultivate an online voice.
By the way, I found you via MyBlogLog. Hope to "see" you again soon!