Comments on: Washington Post needs to do some structural work on its shaky new strategy

By: maxim gundarov

maxim gundarov — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 08:20:06 +0000

I agree with everything you said. I really hope that Washington Post will care to read your post.

By: Denise Cheng

Denise Cheng — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 13:00:01 +0000

Tom-

What you’re talking about with an Internet community gathering place housed by news sites sounds a lot like what Ning can offer. But I’m curious how that would even begin to work with a journalism-based outlet, where although social media and engagement are encouraged, site interactivity and functionality are also strictly controlled.
There are many media-based nonprofits that utilize Ning right now, but they also have a hard time keeping engagement up despite having almost all the same tools as Facebook. This might not be a problem for an outlet that has a big readership, but I’m curious as to how a news org like WaPo–assuming its goal is ultimately civic engagement–would be able to steer participation toward thoughtful comments and critical thinking rather than blather. Any ideas?

By: Jonathan Krim

Jonathan Krim — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 18:32:16 +0000

Tom, thanks for the provocative commentary. We are striving continuously for deeper and broader engagement and to build community, in many areas and on many levels. Some items perhaps you missed in your site visits: Our searchable directory of more than 400 area bloggers who signed up to be included, complete with tag cloud, latest posts, etc. Our spring and summer blog by a group of readerswho kicked the tires on the new baseball stadium in DC. A series on childhood obesity, a particular problem in inner cities, complete with a virtual, interactive store to help readers learn how to shop for healthier food. Our mashup of charitable-giving opportunities so that those with more could help those with less this holiday season. Our multi-part series on the woeful state of DC's schools, with interactive, school-by-school database documenting the horrors, and a follow-up look at charter schools, with discussion boards on each school. A series on DC slumlords who forced tenants out on the streets so they could turn their buildings condo. It also taught residents how to report abuse. DC housing inspectors were fired and landlords fined as a result of the investigation. Just a sampling. All best, Jonathan Krim Assistant Managing Editor/Local washingtonpost.com

By: Tom Grubisich

Tom Grubisich — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 16:10:33 +0000

In an OJR article last year on managing anonymous commenting, I dealt with the questions raised in Russ’s new comment, including the very important one of how to protect whistle blowers — http://www.www.ojr.org/ojr/stories/070806grubisich

By: Russ Walker

Russ Walker — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 15:39:49 +0000

Tom,

Three points in response to your response:

1) A determined reader can create a fake profile at just about any site on the Web. There’s no way to get to 100% accuracy on that, at least not now.

2) The Pluck system that washingtonpost.com uses DOES at least tie comments to a specific registered user in the system. So an abusive commenter can be banned.

3) I hope you are not arguing against anonymity in every case. Much great journalism is based on anonymous sourcing. Also, some readers may have valuable information or commentary to offer but can’t do so under their real name for various reasons. I think the wp.com system, imperfect as it is, does empower readers to sound off AND gives the Web site a way to ban abusive commenters. Readers are encouraged to flag abusive comments, and there is a small staff that works to respond to those complaints.

A question to you: Do you want a comment policy that closely mimics the “letters to the editor” page in newspapers?

By: Tom Grubisich

Tom Grubisich — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 07:34:44 +0000

The practical result of the “enhanced registration requirements” at washingtonpost.com that Russ correctly credits to Jim Brady was — nothing. Go to any post.com discussion area, and 99.9% of the commenters wear paper bags over their heads. Who would want to find or build an online home in this kind of community?

By: 206.169.225.114

206.169.225.114 — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:35:18 +0000

I agree with most of your piece on The Washington Post, but I think you’re wrong about Jim Brady and anonymity. Under Jim, the site instituted enhanced registration requirements, a comments-monitoring operation and a simple social networking platform (Pluck) that exposes commenters’ usernames. Yes, people can create fake
profiles on washingtonpost.com (just as determined users can on Facebook), but to say Brady is somehow a diehard defender of anonymity at the expense of holding readers accountable for saying stupid or offensive things is a gross mischaracterization.

Cheers,

Russ Walker