I read the article.  While I didn't find it particularly compelling, it does contain some information Duluthians may find interesting.

Of importance to me personally is the fact that they do not plan on charging for online content in the near future.  This sets my mind at ease knowing I won't be relegated to reading more posts like this one.

I completely agree Paul.  

They could have - at the very least - made reference to other news outlets across the country that have discussed charging for content.

They don't allow "uncivil" comments on the website.  That's great!  

Now, will someone tell me where THAT website is because the DNT site I know has a legacy of racist, classist, sexist, homophobic comments and where otherwise ignoramus rants are all the rage.  Rage. Literally.  

Also find it noteworthy that there are no comments open on this particular piece.  

I agree its a story to be covered, but ... you're right @ndy, HOW it was covered doesn't exactly pass the smell test.  It runs like an advertorial for website advertising and Browall appears to steamroll right past any critics with legitimate concerns about coverage (like the nurse interviewed).  Plus I saw nothing on staff cuts - doesn't anyone at the chamber care about people losing their jobs?  I seriously doubt that.  Hopefully that wasn't self-censorship on the reporters part and Candace just missed that.  Or maybe she just didn't have space in their Fantastic! New! "shorter" and thinner news story format. Just what everybody wants.

Each new bit of news out of the DNT I get one step closer to canceling my subscription ...

A year ago, the newsroom had five more reporters, two more photogs and two more copy editors than it does now.  "Better"?  Come on.

What: Informational Picket
Who: Lake Superior News Guild and supporters
When: Thursday, Feb. 25, noon to one
Where: Duluth News Tribune, 424 W. 1st Street

I thought it was a pretty interesting article, though I laughed at the publisher claiming they didn't allow uncivil comments on the website. I had an annoying experience once, when a woman calling herself "Lisa M" altered and re-posted two comments on the DNT website that had originally been posted on Progressive Action's private listserve. "Lisa M" also included some pretty abusive insults directed at me in the comments she posted on the DNT website. 

It took about 12 hours for the DNT to finally take down the comments after I complained. But the good thing about this whole incident was that we at PA were able to smoke out this woman and kicked her off of our listserve for violating our policies.

So, I have to say, since the DNT's moderation of their website was so spotty and they also allowed a few blogging addicts to take over threads and spew crap, I am glad they finally stopped allowing them. Like Barrett, some of those comments posted there made me so damn embarrassed to be a Duluthian.

I think it's good when newspapers cover themselves. They deserve to be the focus of scrutiny just as any other enterprise does. If they ever go too far, it's because they don't want to be accused of sweeping anything under the rug; that might be why this story got a little more play than its content would ordinarily merit.

The DNT stopped allowing online comments because two trolls with no lives - Dr Z and Dan H - took over every thread and had to comment on everything, airing their racist, sexist, and homophobic opinions to people who could care less.

The BBC's comments are decent because they moderate them.

Go to ABC News, Politico, wherever, they are sheer hell.

I guess we'll have to get our ranting idiot fix from Craigslist now! Alas.

The Budgeteer stopped allowing online comments when about a half-dozen right-wing trolls flamed Ralph Doty unmercifully for writing a column critical of Ron Stone, the former mgr for KDAL Radio and other stations.

I'm pretty sure that it was just easier for the DNT to remove comments all together than to actually have a warm body moderate it. That's what was lacking- timely (and "fair") moderating.

Well, another part about what Calk is not saying is that I *think* the blogger/reporter has to do their own moderating of comments.  So we have an already very busy reporter covering two or three beats or more aNd having to moderate comments on the blog.  So its the same thing that TimK is saying again ... not enough time/care/attention/to do the moderation fairly.

I got burned really bad here on PDD with screaming comments on a post or two that really bothered me.  I have seen firsthand that moderating comments is very difficult to do.  It requires technical, ethical, and editorial faculties that not everyone has.  

I don't think I'm very good at it, for one.  Even when I don't have an agenda it seems like I do more often than not have a bias somewhere deep down where I can hardly see it, but it looks like a gigantic billboard to others.

I just want to make clear, about the time I complained to the newspaper about someone calling herself "Lisa M"'s comments on the DNT's website: even though the comments this "Lisa M" directed towards me were personal attacks, what really pissed me off and made me complain was that this person actually altered and then reposted on the DNT comments that I and someone else had written and posted on Progressive Action's private listserve. That kind of thing really pisses me off, because it's so dishonest. 

Anyway, what was also interesting, was that when the PA moderators looked up the contact information we had for anyone named "Lisa M" on our listserve, we googled the full name we had in our records and were gobsmacked that this person's name was the very same as the maiden name of a well-known sitting city councilor known for "stirring the pot" with his right-wing world view. We also discovered that the address "Lisa M" had provided PA when she registered did not exist.

This is why the DNT, or any legitimate news outlet, should make people register if they want to post comments. That way, if trolls abuse the privilege, effective measures can be taken. I think the fact that there is some accountability on this blog and *definitely* on PA, is why they remain such valuable sources of information and online interaction.

"Anyway, what was also interesting, was that when the PA moderators looked up the contact information we had for anyone named "Lisa M" on our listserve, we googled the full name we had in our records and were gobsmacked that this person's name was the very same as the maiden name of a well-known sitting city councilor known for "stirring the pot" with his right-wing world view."


Wait a sec here.  I'm trying to follow this intriguing episode of Columbo, but I'm a little confused.  This well-known city councilor is a "he" and he has a maiden name?  Um...what?

Gotcha.  Intriguing.  At the risk of encouraging this Oliver Stone-esque conspiracy theory (who am I kidding, I love this sort of thing), what was the "similar" last name in-question?  Also, how do you and your pals at PA know her maiden name?

You love it?  How do you think someone like me who laughs his ass off at this kind of stuff feels?

Here are Robin Washington's remarks on the closing of comments on the DNT's website if you are interested: http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/article/id/161563/

Barrett, that is a great idea, I hope you pitch that to the powers-that-be at the DNT. I think that would definitely curb some of the abuses that have been so prevalent on the DNT's website. My attitude is, if you aren't going to say something to someone face-to-face, then, for god's sakes, don't use the anonymity of the Internet to write something. On the PA listserve, we don't ask for money to offset costs of moderation, but the fact we ask for complete contact information and people have to agree to our policies before joining and will be kicked off for violating any of them has helped make for a mostly-civil discussion over there.