Jason Sandford
Jason Sandford is a reporter, writer, blogger and photographer interested in all things Asheville.
I admit it: I loathe the Asheville Citizen-Times message boards. And I strongly disagree with how the newspaper’s editors manage the boards.
Here’s the latest example:
Each Saturday, the Citizen-Times features a “Home of the Week.” The story profiles the home owners, and details the architect, interior designers and appointments of art and other details that make the home special. The “Home of the Week” story was aimed at wealthy people — the newspaper knows that most of its readers are homeowners and have enough money for things like home re-designs and newspaper subscriptions. The story was also aimed at advertisers trying to reach those very people.
A few weeks ago, the feature appeared. Then, the message board comments took off. The commenters on the boards are already racist and homophobic and generally highly critical of anyone “not from around here.” The comments bashed the homeowner, and bashed the newspaper feature for only displaying the houses of rich white people. Where are the featured homes regular people can afford?
On and on the comments go, just as they go on and on whenever the topic of immigration comes up, or when there’s a story about the AIDS Quilt coming to Asheville, or whenever there’s a crime story and a chance to pick on people who live in public housing.
Only this time, the subject of the newspaper story fought back. He was appalled at his treatment on the message board, and told the newspaper so a long letter, which the newspaper printed as a “guest editorial.”
Then the comments stopped. The newspaper shut commenting off on Home of the Week stories. Why?
The newspaper’s policy when I worked there was, “we don’t moderate comments.” The commenting system for the newspaper’s Web site is handled by Topix, which gives the newspaper a degree of separation. If someone has a problem with a comment, they have to flag it with Topix and ask Topix to take action.
Note: Topix and the Citizen-Times are both owned by Gannett.
When people inside the newsroom would complain, Editor Phil Fernandez would always argue that the online community would “police itself,” that the good people would out-yell and out-number the bad people, etc. Only that never happens.
Anyone with a sane voice who tries to speak out against commenters who throw around statements that, by the way, would never, ever, get printed in the daily paper, gets shouted down on the boards. The boards don’t police themselves — they just breed more contempt when allowed to run rampant.
So here’s how it works at the Citizen-Times:
If you’re rich and white, the newspaper decides people can’t say bad things about you.
If you’re brown and get caught up in an immigration sting, people can leave hundreds and hundreds of nasty comments about you, published for the world to see by the daily newspaper.
Oh, and one other note: If you’re a profitable newspaper slashing jobs and laying off workers and drastically revamping your print product and getting sued and not delivering newspapers to the projects, you’re immune from the commenting horde. The Citizen-Times doesn’t allow comments on stories about itself.
The Citizen-Times claims it wants to be the center for dialogue, the center of true community conversation. Yet it allows the nastiest, the most vile type of comments and discussions to run without rein on its web site. The level of hypocrisy amazes me. It’s the level of hypocrisy that the newspaper normally rails about on its editorial pages.
I’d go over to the C-T web site and leave this comment on Saturday’s “Home of the Week” story, but I can’t.
Well, Gannet owns a stake in us, but specifically does not have editorial control over our site (we actually have that written into our contract).
I think you’re overstating the case of the Citizen Times taking action on "rich white people’s" part — I think what you’re seeing here is that attacks on individuals identified by names get more editorial touch than slamming a group of people.
For the record, there are about 8% of comments that are auto-killed by the moderation systems, and probably about 3% more killed by human moderation.
And, for someone championing being the center of dialog, leaving up what the people have to say would seem to be a requirement for that.
What people say anonymously is pretty much what they really think, and the power to censor the opinions of the masses is a ship that’s sailed. The future of media involves maximizing participation, not trying to put blinders on around what people say and think….
Chris Tolles
CEO, Topix
Other than censoring comments, not delivering to poor people, and not doing any negative stories about advertisers (Mission), and other than cutting back on quality and content and charging more, it’s a pretty good newspaper.
Scoop, thank you!
Thanks, FJK. Let’s get together for lunch sometime soon.
This is exactly why people are canceling their subscriptions. And don’t view their lame arse company dictated web site. I feel for the boys in online at the ACT, they are very talented but shackled at their desk.
Ash: You rock and I just sent you a donation. Keep it up bro.
Charles Randy Hammer is real name, pretty sho
Junebug, I think his name is Randy Hammer.
Nice points, Ash. Either moderate comments on ALL content or allow them on ALL content. Seems so simple, doesn’t it?
So true. The Voice of the Mountains? Sure, but don’t talk about us because we get our feelings hurt very easily, and our target demographic is too good to get sullied by common folk.
It starts at the top. When you have a heavy-handed publisher controlling the content, one who lives among the Home of the Week crowd, you get censoring. Plus, when editors are out of touch and don’t leave their offices, when they won’t or can’t say anything to the publisher, it’s easy to become the voice of the upper white class.
The top editor is a nice guy but one who seems to lack the gumption, courage to take any kind of stand. He’s a perfect fit for someone like Randy.
Here’s my last thought: From reading these posts, Charlie Hammer wants to collect his $20,000+ month salary, sit in his office, make a few employment cuts to non-newsroom jobs, not piss off his neighbors at Biltmore Lake, and go have drinks with the Chamber crowd, driving there in his company-paid luxury car. He’s on the take and he is ruining this paper and hurting the lives on many good and decent people.
Well done, Ash! Couldn’t have said it better myself. I can also attest to the last line of your commentary. Awhile back, you allowed my critical post regarding the AC-T’s sudden refusal to make sure newspapers were delivered to neighborhoods like Hillcrest and Klondyke. In that posting, I promised you and the readers of Ashvegas I’d forward it along to the paper, daring the Letters To The Editor folks to print it. At the time, I admitted I knew that would never happen. I was correct and so are you. On-line comments ought to be more than a one-way street. The fact that isn’t the case is truly discriminatory and pathetic.