MinnPost has been publishing reader comments on stories since its founding in 2007 as a way to encourage civil, thought-provoking and high-quality public discussion. We’ve encouraged the public to engage with our editors and writers and with other comment posters.
But after a careful review of story comments over the past year and an assessment of the resources it takes to manage comments – including the corps of amazing volunteer moderators – MinnPost editors have decided to stop publishing comments on all stories starting today.
Before I explain that decision in more detail, I want to emphasize MinnPost’s continued commitment to reader engagement and to creating spaces where readers can connect with our newsroom and with each other. Now more than ever, Minnesota needs civic conversations to help surface solutions to complicated problems and create connections between people who can work together to strengthen their communities. MinnPost and other news organizations play a key role in sparking these conversations and connections.
MinnPost will continue engaging with readers through events, including this month’s MinnPost Festival and regular MinnPost Socials where audience members can interact with our journalists in a casual atmosphere. Our reporters and editors already respond to reader questions and comments via email and social media and will continue to do so. The newsroom accepts Community Voices and counterpoint pieces and has also worked to engage readers on specific topics through regular call-outs in our newsletters and/or in links on stories.
I’m interested in hearing your feedback on these efforts, in addition to inviting reaction to this most recent decision to end published comments. I know that some readers will miss the opportunity to weigh in via comments, read comments, or both. Members of our staff will also miss reader comments. For example, our Washington, D.C., reporter Ana Radelat told readers of the D.C. Memo today that she continues to invite their ideas, thoughts and criticisms via email.
Here are the factors that went into our decision to stop publishing comments:
- Comment quality. Our editors and volunteer comment moderators have noticed the quality of comments deteriorate in recent years. We see more commenters picking fights with each other or having off-topic conversations that have little or nothing to do with the story on the page.
- Comment participation trends. Editors analyzed the last year of comments and found that of 19,000 approved comments on the site, 55% of them were made by 20 people, and 77% were made by 50 people. MinnPost’s goals around source diversity and engaging and serving communities across the state require us to be intentional to ensure we’re including and reflecting the views of our broader audience. Dedicating resources to a commenting space dominated by a small group is not furthering those goals.
- Editorial capacity and priorities. As a nonprofit, MinnPost has relied on volunteers willing to read and approve comments, and we’re extremely grateful for their commitment and dedication over the years (if you’d like to express your appreciation for them, please do so here). One of the newsroom’s editors has been managing the volunteer schedule, and staff sometimes must fill in when a volunteer is unavailable.
Taking all of these factors into consideration, it makes sense for MinnPost to end comments and redeploy our resources to engage with readers in other ways. We also encourage readers who want to express their opinion to consider writing and submitting a Community Voices opinion piece or counterpoint.
In addition to thanking our volunteer comment moderators, I want to thank our readers for sharing their insights, perspectives and humor in the comments section over the years. I look forward to hearing from you on this decision (I’m leaving comments open on this page, or you can reach out by email or on Twitter/X). Going forward, please use feedback(at)minnpost.com for comments on stories, news tips or to notify us of possible errors in stories. Editors monitor the inbox during the day.
And another light goes dark. I already left, but I am left saddened that another outlet to push back against the endemic misinformation campaign of the right bows to their neverending flood. The era of free information was nice, wasn’t it?
Another light goes dark, indeed. As an admitted news junky, I’ve always found it difficult to engage conversations about the news in an online space because the zone gets so flooded with nonsense and, frankly, hate. Just look at Twitter or the Star Tribune’s comment section as an example. It is less about engaging in a conversation with others and more about… I don’t really know how to describe it, honestly, but it definitely isn’t constructive. MinnPost felt different and I am going to miss it.
Do other have suggestions of where else I could go to scratch that itch?
I lurk around Kos, but it has its own set of issues.
Whatever. Good luck. I understand your problems with the comments but don’t claim to be promoting discussion while ending it. That was a lot of free content you’re turning away.
I agree, I can see the issues but disagree with the solution.
Minnpost has a “Letters” section but it’s never seen much activity, perhaps that might be a better venue for responses to stories than the community voices section, particularly when we need to rebut some of the obvious corporate shilling that goes on in the community voices.
Let’s call a spade a spade, I suspect a large portion of this decision was the pushback those shill pieces receive. This isn’t the Minnpost of 2010, or even 2018. The writing quality has degraded (please don’t interpret this as an attack on the current staff, but rather as an appreciation of those that came before), and the editorial decisionmaking has taken an abrupt rightward lurch in the past few years. Money, as always, is the culprit to blame.
We have not been receiving letters, but I will be curious to see if more people submit counterpoints to Community Voices. I’m open to exploring a way to regularly publish letters (if we get them).
Seems a lot of “exploring” going on here.
One would think the exploring would have reached some answers so that a change (no comments) and an alternative (carefully explored) would happen together.
I know little of the news business, but believe it to be the generation of content guided by a mission that elicits a response that leads to an ever increasing following in numbers and loyalty. And in the internet business things are a bit different: beyond the paid subscriptions and ad revenue of our ever diminishing printed newspapers, the internet enables tracking every click and following that click to determine time in the content before the next click. And beyond that even some demographic data on the clicker.
What is unknown is did the clicker actually read and comprehend the piece? What was their reaction to it? Was that reaction significant enough to generate a response? Eric Black is an extremely accomplished, long experienced journalist. I clicked back through a few of his final contributions and they universally seemed to elicit rapid responses from the MINNPOST 50 and others. VICTORY. Mission accomplished, 30-70 comments in a few days. Eric Black is the journalistic gold standard and commenting frequency and content confirmed it.
Now consider some of the new features brought on to MINNPOST: Only a few comments at best. Maybe that shows possible shortcomings in content generation. The MINNPOST solution: get rid of those annoying comments that only serve to second guess the decisions of management.
Hmmm….
No need to end commenting, just keep up the editorial decisions of late that generate no comments and commenting will die its own natural death.
Here’s to the next regime that will bring commenting back. I guarantee it…
I agree Paul. I have noticed some stories with information missing or lacking perspective at times. Many people don’t have time to write up a commentary and submit it or attend various open sessions. On the other hand, endless one liners lacking much in the way of facts is also worrisome. I would have hoped for a middle ground. Too often it is the same information rehashed or emotion based without exploring in detail various perspectives and how they interpret the facts. Example resource officers in schools–how many news outlets reported that only the Education committee reviewed the bill vs having mental health, justice, etc committees weigh in on the complexities of the wording? Lots of us support no force in schools unless it is absolutely necessary but define safety risk and why many officers find it too vague. Unfortunately we live in a world of 5 minute news stories.
I’ll miss your contributions. Thank you for a decade of valuable insights.
Paul, I will say I didn’t post much and I didn’t always agree with some of your views but I do appreciate the thoughtfulness and reasoning you put into your comments. Yours were almost always high quality comments and will be among those I miss most. Thanks!
While I’m not surprised, I am disappointed. I’ve been expecting this development since Eric Black’s departure. His approach – going back to his strib days – serves an example for how to promote and manage respectful dialog in the comments. (Bob Collins’s blogs at MPR were another, also now defunct, example.) Yes, it takes work. But it also draws readers and contributors – financial contributors. As a long time reader and contributor to Minn Post, I’m wondering how frequently I’ll use the site in the future, and whether I’ll continue to contribute.
Point being: I’ve learned as much from other commenters as I’ve learned from the formal authors and contributors. Having a comment section should be viewed as an asset and draw, not just a chore. Yes, there’s a lot of chaff to filter through, but there’s also wheat in there. I think it’s a mistake to throw it away.
Lastly, the suggestion of using Twitter/X to interact with minnpost has zero appeal. If the quality of comments here is the issue, that platform seems a worse alternative.
I agree that Minnpost had attracted a pretty good band of willing and able commenters, who had some good (and funny) things to say about the state and nation. As Paul says above, a lot of free content, much of it quite valuable.
I will miss reading the thoughts of the Minnpost band, and throwing out my own.
I’ll miss your contributions. Thank you for a decade of valuable insights.
Well put, Brian.
This. I left Twitter and will not join X. I use my real name here, so I hope that some of the people I have read and respect in the comments section will find me on LinkedIn (I live in Minnesota and work for a large food company, so I should be easy to find for those that wish to find me – I don’t otherwise do social media). I will miss my MinnPost “friends.” I wish some of you didn’t have names that will make it hard for me to hunt down in other venues. I hope MinnPost finds a way to let readers interact in a more real time way, but absent that, I don’t see how it’s much different from a lot of other news sources. I do wish that there was more diversity in high quality posters, but I do bet that a lot more readers were attracted to the comments than actually contributed to the comments. And I can’t help the quality of what others posted. I have tried to be respectful and factual – providing sources and reasoning – but I’m not perfect and sometimes I took the bait from commenters whose only apparent motive was to irritate others. Misinformation should not be left alone, even as a comment on a news site. And I do feel like many articles published here were enhanced by broader perspectives that the authors of the articles either didn’t have the time or knowledge to include.
“And I do feel like many articles published here were enhanced by broader perspectives that the authors of the articles either didn’t have the time or knowledge to include.”
Agreed, and not to forget the total, one sided, PR pieces by paid lobbyist types who now can climb up on the MINNPOST town square and spread their slanted, paid viewpoints without the inconvenience of fact checking. Here’s 2 of them:
https://www.minnpost.com/community-voices/2022/10/california-car-mandates-have-consequences-for-minnesotans/?hilite=amy+koch
https://www.minnpost.com/community-voices/2022/12/why-large-hydro-nuclear-and-carbon-capture-should-be-included-in-minnesotas-carbon-free-energy-mix/?hilite=carbon+capture
At least my contributions were submitted without compensation and out of a sense of civic doody.
I have enjoyed your level-headed and insightful comments. Keep up the good work, fellow citizen.
I’ll miss your contributions. Thank you for a decade of valuable insights.
Very well stated. I enjoy and learn from the posted comments. I have posted occasionally when I feel that I have knowledge about the subject, or a perspective to share. Some of the commenters are regular and I look forward to their views. Even the ones that I don’t usually agree with. I find that they are useful in helping to understand where a close friend (who is pretty Fox News oriented) might be coming from. Bottom line, for me, the comment section is a major reason I visit Minnpost. Please reconsider your decision to terminate it.
I sort of thought of MinnPost as a community where people were in conversation with each other. I thank the other posters who read my postings and responded to them. I have valued and learned from the discussion. I want to thank the moderators who tolerated my verbosity. And most of all I want to thank MinnPost who provided this forum. All of it will be missed.
Really sad to see this, as an out state reader this is by far the best method I had for engagement
Allowing comments about the phasing-out of comments! Gotta love it!
I’m especially sad for selected members of the almost-too-outspoken Twin Cities anti-democracy flat earth society — they (and you) know who they are. I have to wonder who they’ll turn to, where they’ll choose to waste their time, squander those superior intellects etc.
Ah but that’s the rub. There will always be endless fever swamps of right wing noise into which they can retreat, where dissent is prevented by online lynch mobs and death threats. The trolls always have safe haven among their own, they can then emerge at the next reasonable outlet, eager and willing to run them into the ground as well. Eventually the fever swamps will be all that remain, where the loons can validate their looniness amongst themselves, and we reasonable folks will be made to be silent, as any attempt to create for ourselves a forum for ourselves will similarly be destroyed.
Can we still submit short editorials (letters to the editor) and guest columns?
We have not been publishing letters and have not been receiving letter submissions. But we’re exploring that.
Back when you had letters it always kind of felt like a negative feedback loop, the section wasn’t on the front page much because you didn’t get letters regularly, so people didn’t know about it, so you didn’t get letters, so it wasn’t on the front page…
Maybe now that comments are going away you might get more short form community voices and can effectively have a “letters” section by bundling several into a weekly section.
Maybe you could call them Notes for those of us who view letters as a more lengthy endeavor. 😉
Having run a community Facebook page for a number of years, I understand how much work is involved to monitor a comments section. And your reasons are valid from a corporate perspective in regards to the share of resources comments will pull and the number of people the section serves.
Don’t underestimate the value the Comments have provided over the years, in terms of both a broadened perspective as well as reader engagement. When I’ve chosen to read articles here, especially opinion pieces, I’ve always looked at the comments to gauge where readers stand on the issue being discussed. Yes, there are some who always share their opinions–reasoned or not–and for them my storage of salt is large. But there are others who share important perspective, for example, those who live in the area represented by a legislator who is discussed in an article or those who live in an area affected by a Met Council decision, or those who work in an industry affected by promulgation of a recent rule or law. Those are important, relative, and useful perspectives that will be lost by this decision. Unfortunately you’ve allowed the minority (abusers) to diminish that value provided to most readers and make MinnPost less valuable.
A could not agree more. I also appreciate that you commented. There have been some new(ish) commenters lately, and comments from the occasional commenters (like you) that I’ve been truly happy to see. I am probably one of the handful of “over posters” (I have hundreds of pages of posts since 2011), but I value the new voices and occasional voices as much or more than the usual suspects. Thank you.
There is a challenge to communication engagement even with people who lack an honest opinion. Most people can easily identify them and call them out. It gave some depth to conversation. Shutting down the conversation by MinnPost creates a hole in our knowledge about each other and our community. I don’t think MinnPost is running away from these challenges because people are unreasonable. I think the idea of participating and managing multiple boards is overwhelming for volunteers or even paid writers working on their next story. For some of us, focusing on each story requires long and tedious research. I don’t fully believe that multitasking produces quality in many areas of any business, especially journalism. The question of did anyone benefit from the comments I made, or was there consensus, and constructive critique of what was said? You had the opportunity to provide some kind of meaningful response in a relative short period of time. Whether it mattered was important. A letter to the writer is only one perspective and response is usually the same.
PS. I used to have a whole folder of canned responses to letters. It was a corporate way of handling email.
What you might do is initiate a “Letters to the Editor” section. Three times a week, you could publish a collection of comments, rebuttals, etc.. Each individual piece would be much shorter than a Community Voices essay — anywhere from 2-3 sentences to 2-3 paragraphs. It would be less work and more civilized, and a genuine way of engaging readers.
They had a letters section but apparently they did away with in in 2022. It was rarely on the front page so it was easy to miss. I’d like it if they reinstated it now that they’re removing comments because as you said sometimes you don’t want to write an 800 word essay to rebut a given article or opinion piece.
I’m taking the letters feedback into consideration. Editorial capacity will be a factor there. I will also emphasize that a Community Voices piece or commentary DOES NOT have to be 600 or 700 words (the max we tell people to shoot for). It can be shorter, and sometimes shorter is better!
Here’s a breakdown of the breakdown:
19,000 comments in the past year
55% of those from 20 people
Another 22% of those from another 30 people
So, for the worst-offending 20, that’s 10,540 comments in one year, for an average of 522 per person.
And for the 30 runners-up, that’s an additional 4,180 comments for an average of 139 per person.
So the rest of us accounted for the remaining 4,370 comments. That’s twelve comments a day for the entire adult readership of Minnpost (everyone except the unfortunate fifty). That seems like a healthy number of thoughtful, at least nominally valuable comments spread across an interested readership.
Self-control and self-awareness are missing for fifty of us. Unfortunately, we all pay the price.
I wouldn’t, as (I can only assume) a former member of that “nifty fifty”, suggest that all members of that group are created equally. No one here is stupid, we all know who the “problems” are. It’s disingenuous to suggest otherwise.
Matt:
At this moment, you personally represent over 25% of the comments made in this one article. You’ve made seven comments out of 27 total.
Self-control and self-awareness.
I have points to make, and happen to be available to make them now. If the number goes down as more commenters appear, will I then be exhibiting “self-control” (never minding my self imposed exile, during which I believe I have made exactly 2 posts in 2 months?)
Quality and Quantity have zero correlation.
That is the same flawed argument Minnpost used to justify shutting down the comments. Why would seven lame comments by seven different people be superior than seven good comments by one guy.
Also, since its the last day of comments, why not go out with a bang?
I agree 100%. The numerical argument used to justify doing away with comments is not compelling at all. Some people have more time to engage in online discussions. I come to Minnpost to read news stories and like to check the comments to see if there is anything the author of the news story missed or did not consider. It helps people think critically about issues to see various viewpoints. Sounds to me like Minnpost doesn’t want to foster critical thinking.
I second Mike Postma’s out state concern as well as Brian Simon’s ‘learning from others’.
Have you considered accepting comments that add to and enhance the article’s context from a reader’s perspective and experiences and not accept commenter on commenter input ? That would address your concern of commenter fights as well as giving readers the opportunity to broaden the writing’s validity.
Festivals and Socials held within the twins do not appeal to us out state readers.
How would that be any different than the current system, which is apparently untenable.
This is great feedback, Dennis. Thank you. Setting the bar even higher for comments can be tricky. We went with the all (assuming they meet guidelines) or nothing approach for now, settling on nothing. My hope is we’ll keep hearing from readers and find other (and perhaps new) ways to share their perspectives with our audience, allowing us to learn from you and for you all to learn from each other.
“My hope is we’ll keep hearing from readers and find other (and perhaps new) ways to share their perspectives with our audience, allowing us to learn from you and for you all to learn from each other.”
The above comment is beyond patronizing. It is preceded by telling us it was an “all or nothing” proposition and they were going with nothing and then concluded with the expression of a heartfelt desire to learn from each other, but, apparently, only through approved, accommodating channels.
See you at the Social!!!
Beyond patronizing.
A good solution. I shied away from posting when the same old 22 posters made the same old left wing liberal talking points and they and their cohorts would attack those who didn’t agree with them. Good riddance to the trash DFL posters.
Doctor, heal thyself.
Suddenly I find myself agreeing with the decision to shut down the comment section…
This right here is why there’s been more invective. Self reflection along with reality has been completely dismissed by “conservatives.” When liberals push back, it seems that the mods step in to avoid conflict, thus complaints about inconsistent moderation.
I’ll miss some posters a lot others won’t be missed one iota.
Adios
Yes. There are those I will absolutely miss. I hope Ray can post once more. But others… Not so much. While I appreciate a different opinion, I don’t appreciate the mud slinging some commenters have resorted to the last couple of years.
Ah, well. My work here is done. As Jesus said, go to where the sinners are.
“Ah, well. My work here is done. As Jesus said, go to where the sinners are.”
See you over on Powerline Dennis…
Yup. I go by Akicita there.
While we have seldom agreed,, I’ll miss your contributions, and the resulting arguments about Marx, Locke and tax policy. Thank you for a decade of valuable insights.
What forum are you going to foist your BS on next?
I’m going to miss your point of view, Dennis.
sorry guys. this is my fault. every time I find a site where I can zing local republicans the mods shut off comments before I scare away their reader base. again I apologize and au revoir
I was thinking the same thing about myself.
I thought it was me.
OK to be honest I thought it was you as well. ;}
LOL.
streets.mn took this approach a few years ago and it was a contributing factor in their slide to irrelevance.
I will miss the heterodox commenters on this site who challenged mainstream narratives, and I am concerned this will lead content more towards a single viewpoint and an echo chamber without the calming throttle of alternative narratives and viewpoints in the comments.
When you say irrelevance, did their readership decline?
I would suggest that you review the quality of the comments at a place like Powerline to MINNPOST.
The MINNPOST commentariat and its’ semi moderated environment is civil discourse times ten. I offered a comment on
The comments are often better than the content. I never caught the “all call” for volunteers to address the dilemma.
Good bye RB, Dennis, Joe, Paul, Ray, Andy, BK and WHD: I will miss you and the rest of the now terminated MINNPOST commentariat: It was fun and informative while it lasted.
“I never caught the “all call” for volunteers to address the dilemma.”
Indeed. Who knew there were volunteers?
As one of the very few women who submitted comments on MinnPost in the past two or three years, I have a comment and a suggestion for the editors who decided that comments on posts are irrelevant or noxious or just too expensive to moderate:
First, as a Univeristy professor for four decades, let me state that of a given population of readers/listeners, only a tiny portion are willing to speak up publicly to comment or enter into debate, or even ask a question. It’s always the same ones. You know, the opinionated, and sometimes those who are just verbose (count me in). I once had a mentally ill student who interrupted all the time; we got treatment for him, and in MinnPost’s case, moderating and omitting his comments would be the equivalent. Instead of bewailing that there have only been about 50 of us commenting, MinnPost should make attempts to get more people interested in Coming Out of the Woodwork Where They Lurk.
Second, I have always refused to “belong” to any unmoderated forum on-line. Twitter is a sewer, like the Star Tribune’s comments page, because almost anything goes [X is even worse]. I do, though, continue to contribute to debates on e-democracy forums that are strongly moderated. I like that. And I frequently post comments to the New York Times on-line , which are fiercely moderated and that moderation and censorship has taught me a lot about what is “too heated” in my own rhetoric. In that sense the Times is helping us be better writers and thinkers.
MinnPost seems to be abdicating a useful role it has and can play in Minnesota public discourse on-line, by encouraging more people to comment on the news and opinions, but moderating out the ugly and the ad hominem arguments.
Just a parting thought, in a lament for your decision.
Forums subject to tireless gatekeeping by the privileged few are not much more useful than no forum at all, in my opinion. It’s necessary for something with a massive user base like the NYT, which would immediately devolve into madness in the absence of moderation. Less so I would think, for an outlet reaching the population equivalent of a small suburb. I learn very little from the endless repetition of carefully curated talking points one finds at those outlets, far more from the personal opinions of local rabble like myself, even when they might be a bit rough around the edges.
Thank you for being one of the women commenters. I have appreciated you, even when we didn’t always agree. I admit that I found it irritating that some of the commenters, many of whom I enjoyed, would ignore comments by me or you in order to respond to yet another male commenter (sometimes replying to their own posts!) Keep up the good work! And maybe direct me to those moderated forums? I do like to learn from good conversation.
Thank you Rachel & Constance; I recall many quality contributions from both of you.
Another woman commentator here. I’ll miss this feature of MinnPost, even though I haven’t been on this site much lately.
Despite occasional unpleasantness (a poster who is no longer active here once wrote that I didn’t know anything because I’d never been married or had children), this has been one of the more intelligent forums, especially with respect to local issues.
Hail and farewell.
Well said!
I can’t say that I’m surprised, but I wish all of us would look beyond an all or nothing approach. Reflecting on my local government work, we always encourage public comments at our public meetings but those are limited to three minutes and the speaker must identify themselves. It would seem to me that Minnpost could continue promoting civil discourse by implementing a similar rule. Let everyone speak but limit each commenter to only two comments/posts per story. This allows one to share their opinion and then, if necessary, respond to any and all counterpoints at once. I think it would minimize the rambling and argumentative back-and-forth and encourage commenters to pause and think about what they want to say. It would also help to encourage more participation because one wouldn’t get overwhelmed by one or two very active participants. Let’s challenge ourselves to think of new models instead of stopping discourse when it is needed more than ever right now.
Good Luck and good bye Minnpost. The comment section is what made Minnpost better. Commenters, even those i disagreed with, added reality to many a fluff piece on Minnpost. Minnpost will become the Pravda for Progressives. Woke articles on educational achievement gaps, puff pieces on human rights and world peace, one sided articles on the Israeli Palestinian dispute.
Good Bye and Good Luck. Especially to all the commenters.
While I’m sure my politics are pretty much diametrically opposed to Raj’s, I also read MinnPost largely for the comments. I want to see what Raj and others think. I like that this is one of the few places that you’re identified by name so you’re not going to resort to anonymous vitriol. I enjoy the back-and-forth, even if I can predict in advance who’s going to say what. (Still waiting to hear from our favorite retired Colorado history teacher, by the way.) Most of the time, to be honest, I don’t read every word of every article – I’ve got a full time job to deal with – but I skim the articles so I know enough to understand the comments. And those provide a much-needed and pleasant break to my day. I’ll continue to be a contributing member because I believe in local journalism, but I will be much less likely to open this email every day, let alone look forward to it. Shallow? Probably. But my name is attached to this so I feel the need to be truthful.
If today’s special comment section is any indication, the fact that it is useful and sometimes enlightened content from plainspoken and excellent writers.
For me, an ‘outstater’ with a full schedule of caregiving, maintenance and assorted chores, MINNPOST has not only kept me well-informed about the issues and conflicts Minnesotans especially face, but it has given me an opportunity to ‘speak’ my mind and raise my own opinions with a civil audience.
That’s content you can’t even buy.
I’m grateful for all the efforts reporters and writers have made that got us this far in building an exceptional news and information site.
I conclude by agreeing with and repeating Matt Haas’ opening comment, [quote]
” I am left saddened that another outlet to push back against the endemic misinformation campaign of the right bows to their neverending flood. The era of free information was nice, wasn’t it?”
Now MinnPost writers and readers can stay in their safe space where their beliefs and world view isn’t challanged. Diversity doesn’t include diversity of thought.
It’s just easier that way I guess.
I’d like to take this rare and final opportunity to agree with Andy. When I consider MINNPOST content I have a hard time envisioning many of our right wing friends checking into MINNPOST content with any regularity in the future. And me too! A little back and forth in the comments was the lifeblood of many of the articles. A Good Eric Black column would generate 5X the content in a few days. I did not think that was a bad thing. I thought that was indicative of a piece that inspired thought and response.
As a left of center kind of person even I roll my eyes at some of the MINNPOST items and topics that target a small, liberal audience whose lives center around an almost satirical view of what liberals care about. Never better evidenced than by the weekly “Weekend Picks” feature. Sorry I’m going to the Gopher game.
MINNPOST: Carry on in the echo chamber…
Oh no, what will the three of you do now? On a side note, here at the end of it all, one would think would be the time for our resident multiple personality to fess up, no?
Echoing many of those above, the comments are the only reason I tune into MinnPost. Those who speak from a desire to have an informed/informative dialogue, even disagree (again in an informed/informative manner), have given me a lot of food for thought over the years. Like Ms Dunbar reports, the quality of comments has gone down over the past year or three, which it seems to me is a problem of moderation and volunteers not having the time to apply the MinnPost guidelines with the kind of consideration they may have previously had. While cutting off the comments section is the simplest solution to this degradation, I believe there is a better one: Hire a comments moderator (or two).
MinnPost ought to recognize, as others have said, that the comments generates a community, and while the “nifty fifty” make the bulk of the comments there are the rest of us who read the articles to see what sort of dialogue they generate and what we might learn from that dialogue. I for one always value the insights of BK, Constance, Edward, Paul, Rachel, and RB in particular. Even when they might lock horns they keep the ideas and issues centered (even if they may slip in some cutting irony).
Pay someone to grow this community, MinnPost. It is an asset.
Thank you for making that stick 🙂
Thank you, Carter.
Years-long lurker here, not sure if I’ve ever commented (so maybe I’m part of the problem), but I feel obligated now. In short, I think this is a massive, massive mistake. I don’t disagree with their reasons–comment sections can be a cesspool of bickering and negativity, often dominated by a select few. However, I very much disagree with the follow-through. This is a community supported, community driven local/regional news organization. Taking away the “community” aspect of it is simply cutting out what makes MinnPost unique.
Ironically, there are several great suggestions made by commenters in this thread that could have brought greater equity, streamlined what is precious staff time in what is undoubtedly a difficult era for news organizations to survive, and increased the quality. I know removing comments is a decision that makes a lot of sense from their perspective, but it doesn’t make it the right one.
As another lurker, thank you Taylor for saying so well what I think too. Great ideas for a less drastic solution. When I felt I had something knowledgable to add, I have occasionally commented. More often I enjoyed the ongoing discussion and explored the links included by commenters. And if the sniping between “the regulars” was too much I would scroll past to find a different voice.
I do appreciate MinnPost journalism and will retain it as a newsource, but I always read comments and will really miss the varying points of view.
Well, that is disappointing.
The statistics about who is commenting are really interesting, but the fact that there are a small number of commenters making most of the comments is a really poor justification to end comments. There is a lot of ideological diversity among the regular commenters here, and I doubt the statistics would be any different at the Star Tribune or any local/regional news outlet that publishes comments.
As far as the comment quality deteriorating, I would response with two points: 1) the quality of comments is often in the eye of the beholder and 2) the quality of the journalism at Minnpost has significantly declined in recent years, from both the regular staff writers and outside contributors. Much of the staff writing is simply interviewing people, without any pushback or asking for any substantiation. And there doesn’t seem to be any editorial control at all over the outside pieces. When the quality of the journalism declines – as it has at Minnpost – it should not be a surprise that the quality of the comments declines as well. Eliminating comments means that you lose that check on the poor journalism.
The editorial capacity justification is a fair one, and I am sure that moderating comments is a thankless job. I just hope that the extra resources are put into fact-checking outside pieces, and having some editorial review of the staff pieces. Regardless of whether that occurs, Minnpost is diminished as a news outlet by cutting out back and forth by its diverse readership. Oh well.
55% of the comments are made by just 20 people. Jeez, I could name most of those people off the top of my head. What’s the point of running a comments section if the same old (white? retired? male?) people keep rehashing the exact same arguments in different articles? Which is what is happening. It just never ends, like “My great comment will solve this argument once and for all.” Did any of the above commenters actually read the article? Some of them are among the 20, and the rest (like me) never commented enough because the comments section has become a waste of time, with what is essentially political bickering.
Uh welcome to the internet, been here long? The problem isn’t with the commentary, it’s with the mission. At its core, Minnpost hasn’t been a “news organization” in some time. It’s a news aggregator, and of late, not even a particularly good one. Take for example “the Glean”, otherwise known as yesterday’s headlines, behind a paywall. Why would I come here to read the same headlines to stories I couldn’t read yesterday. Minnpost USED to cover national topics, statewide topics, and had columnists to provide thoughtful insights without the need to protect access, like the corporate media. Now that’s gone, replaced by what appears to be a Minneapolis neighborhood weekly, and a gazillion never disappearing features on the pot legislation (seriously, whoever over there has the bee in your bonnet over pot, let it go…). What original reporting can you point to in the last three years, to say ” Hey, everyone, you GOTTA check out this Minnpost story”. In short, the comments are what make this place worth keeping the lights on, without them, it’s sanctimonious version of “Bring Me the News”.
It’s not like MINNPOST even needs to buy ink by the barrel.
Move the comments section to a separate page, a click away. Think the commentariat is a twisted bunch that needs to be avoided? Don’t click.
Can’t get over the financial burden of comment moderation? Go to DISQUS commenting. Often a trash talking free for all with minimal moderation. And that is sometimes interesting too. Suspend the offenders: first offense 1 month, next 6 months, next a year. DISQUS also includes a report user function.
The theme here is that there are countless workable solutions to the “problem” if management cared to solve it. And as to the MINNPOST 50? (AKA Loyal Customers) It is a pretty crass decision to just hit the switch on folks who have exchanged and debated hundreds of topics with thousands of posts over several years leading to funky, odd relationships that maybe can’t be called friendships, but the idea of never again getting an RB, BK, Hiram, Constance, Raj, Dennis, Joe or Andy take on an issue of the day makes me sad. Please reconsider or at least give an alternative a chance.
Some of these comments are the very definition of irony. However, public discourse without content bumpers is almost impossible these days, and the trolls will find another outlet for their venom. Sad to see but likely necessary.
Twenty people wrote 55% of approved comments and fifty wrote 77%. That certainlyhas to be a skewed response sample.
Is it possible to code so that set a minimum number of days before the same person could again comment? This would reduce the number of similar comments.
The problem here is not quantity but quality. Some comments are exceptionally insightful, and others contribute nothing to society.
Free speech is best speech, and to be honest, I never appreciated having my opinions moderated.
I enjoyed reading all the wacky reactions/excuses/spin from leftist apologists to the various disasters the sideshow in St. Paul serves up. So I hope y’all will continue the exchange in the relatively free environment of X. Bring your A game.
I’ll miss your contributions. I never much cared for what you had to say, indeed, this comment may be the first of yours with which i agreed, but it pains me greatly to know the time of personnaly identified debate in minneapolis news forums is over. This entire publication, in my view, was a continuation of Eric Black Ink, which was the best thing ever to happen to news in this city. Thank you for a decade of valuable insights. Maybe I’ll see you on reddit
“(white? retired? male?)” busted. Ok, my diversity chops include out state (St. Cloud), former news reporter in another century that involved a lot of fact checking, a shelf of books on abuse of stats and related distortions, amateur historical research and deep dive internet searcher. Our local newspaper was an early pioneer in online comments, now gone, along with local news coverage.
I tried to comment when it added value. Sometimes worked a draft then decided it wasn’t worthy and trashed it. A barely active late comer to social media, am appalled at the wasted energy consumed by back and forth that fails to add to the discussion (except the funny ones of course).
MinnPost comments taught me to pause and reflect when my first inclination was to ridicule and bash. Based on feedback I scored a couple of wins.
Sorry about the typos. It was a fun ride.
And here is just a tiny example of why the decision was made including two of the top commenters:
By Matt Haas
on Dec. 14, 2022 at 11:43 a.m.
Replying to Ken Tschumper
Let me make one thing completely clear. I. DON’T. CARE.
ABOUT. CONSERVATIVES. They are nothing to me, which is probably better than that object of scorn liberals are to them. I literally could not care less about their feelings. They are objects to be overcome, nothing more.
Reply to Matt Haas
By ian wade
on Dec. 14, 2022 at 3:13 p.m.
Replying to Matt Haas
Amen, Matt!
Reply to ian wade
I became a regular reader of Minnpost precisely because of the comments. I won’t be reading Minnpost once comments are gone. Comments give a variety of viewpoints that news articles don’t have, which provides a starting point for really diving deep on the main subject of the article and critically analyzing possible solutions, background, etc.
And there’s more:
Submitted by Greg Kapphahn on July 31, 2014 – 1:30pm.
You, know, the one where the feathers are falling off and the flesh is rotting,…
can’t bring themselves to seek the things it would take to return them to health,…
because they’re terrified that in doing so, they might have to face the fact that their ill health is the result of their sorry state of intellectual, moral, and spiritual bankruptcy which is completely of their own creation.
So the GOP will continue to circle from its former heights down toward a catastrophic crash to earth,…
a reality which looks more and more like a death wish on the part of conservatives,…
a sort of “If we can’t convert this party to agree with what we believe must certainly be true (while being too fearful to actually consider any contrary evidence);…
if we can’t have the GOP, then NOBODY can. Let it cease to exist.”
They almost seem to have a similar attitude toward the US as a whole.
Suing President Obama for doing exactly what they celebrated George W. Bush for doing, is just one more symptom of “conservative” rot and decrepitude.
More, more, more!
By Jon Kingstad
on June 6, 2022 at 12:58 p.m.
I expect the forthcoming hearings will set forth the damning evidence of what Liz Cheney called yesterday a “well organized conspiracy” to overthrow the government and institute an authoritarian, fascist regime. The election this Fall will not be about competing policies- the GOP has no vision or ideas-it will be about who are the traitors who were and still are trying to undermine democracy in this Republic.
Reply to Jon Kingstad
Don’t forget the best:
By Matt Haas
on April 27, 2023 at 11:21 p.m.
Replying to Dennis Tester
Strange then that I don’t work for the government. The divide is far more simple than that, it’s just selfishness vs. altruism, arrogance vs. humility, truth vs. fantasy. Conservatives are just simply wrong, on every issue, with a consistency that is just spooky. You’d think you folks could come up with a non-sadistic, non-repugnant policy once, by accident if nothing else, but it just never happens. Given the conservative propensity for incompetence, it really defies belief that you all wouldn’t screw up and do something humane every once and a while.
Reply to Matt Haas
Fiction stranger than truth?
By RB Holbrook
on July 30, 2021 at 2:02 p.m.
Replying to Tom Anderson
There were no rioters at the 3rd Precinct. From the TV footage, you would actually think it was a normal tourist visit. We’ve seen plenty of video of people in the police station, and they weren’t rioting. It doesn’t look like an insurrection when you have people that breach the police station– and I don’t condone it – but they’re staying within the public areas of the station. That’s not what a riot would look like. There have been things worse than people without any firearms coming into a building.
How’s that?
Reply to RB Holbrook
I am stunned that the top twenty made up such a low percentage of the total comments.
I should point out that the question is whether comments add or detract from the value of the website in ways that are cost effective. Do readers value them? Do they get a lot of hits?
Ending the Comment section seems a little like cutting off your nose when you only have one dirty nostril.
I doubt I’m one of the top contributors anymore, but this is a sad day, the real end of an era foretold by Eric’s retirement. Half this publication is contributed by lobbyists, and now the other half by student journalists. If you wanted high quality comments, you should have kept publishing high quality journalism. Minnpost is not going to be pleased with this decision in retrospect – you’ve killed the golden goose. So long, and thanks for all the fish.
I’m really sorry to hear this. Often times, we learn extra from the posters.
If it’s because of money, I understand.
If not, I’m disappointed.
I do remember my first two years of college in the 60s at a private Lutheran college in Iowa where we’d discuss politics and sports and could learn from each other. It’s really a disappointment to see that end…and I dislike picking on repubs…but the amount of misinformation in repub land is horrifying.
A big part of the problem with MInnposts comments was the limited functionality vs other publications such as the Washington Post or the Wall Street Journal. There were no like or dislike buttons. Commenters got no notifications when their comments were approved or blocked. Nor did they get any feedback when someone liked or disliked their comments, or when someone replied to their comments.
Other publications get massive numbers of comments on their articles. Why not fix the comments section rather than throwing the feature out?
The main reason I read Minnpost is the comments. Without comments, I won’t be back.
I am here for your journalism – not to promote my own opinion. When comment forums become overrun by the troll army, it is time to turn it off.
Thanks to everyone who has participated in commentary here over the years… you are the people that made this publication a worth while use of my time. Even if I didn’t like you, I will miss you.
For some years I have turned to MinnPost comments as a reach-out to fellow citizens on the issues of the day. It can be an intellectually lonely life to work full time, raise a family, stay attuned to the news of the day but to lack the forum to discuss the topics. MinnPost has provided that and I am very grateful for this format, and to many of you posters, and therefore deeply disappointed to see it go. But I understand why it is being shelved.
Many of you have incredible insights into the issues of the day, and I have gained clarity as often from the comments posted among MinnPost’s readership as I have from the content of the articles. You have enriched my intellectual/political life I thank you for that.
I have likewise been frustrated to see many of the comments turned immediately personal and small, generally along partisan lines. Politically I am center-left but I want and need to understand the appeal of someone who is more center-right. MinnPost has been a place where those ideas can be placed on the table and discussed and sorted out. Most importantly such a format serves to expose interests we have in common. That, after all, is one of the great things about our experiment in democracy – that if we on the left and the right believe in the greater picture (our constitution, the importance of the rule of law, maintaining a decent environment, etc.) we can live together in one nation. When we isolate ourselves with our own tribe and have no avenue for sharing our mutual common space respectfully (physical, political and otherwise), we are doomed. This is where we are now, and I feel deep regret that yet another place where we could be humans together, political differences aside, has been taken away.
And so, to those of you who have offered such stimulating and clarifying positions on the great and complex issues of the day, I thank you for your gifts. I will miss the community I have felt, and I hope we can share space another time, in another place.
Thank you Tom. You speak for me too
Too bad to see the public cut out of these discussions. Too bad we can’t read what each other have to say. Too bad about the loss of whatever sense of community emerged from these comments. Too bad that there isn’t more respect for the value of readers’ opinions and the value of sharing them.
I appreciate the problems. But the solution reminds me of the teacher punishing the whole class for something the boys in the back row did. Couldn’t you simply put a limit on the number of comments a person makes per month or per year?
Now the Lefties can go on saying falsities without anyone calling them on it. My favorites here at Minnpost are COViD vaccine worked, children were affected by COVID, crime is not a problem in Twin Cities, “peaceful protests “ of 20 summer, Minnesota public schools are great, teachers union is working for students, high taxes will not chase out people and businesses to other states, mining and logging are bad, folks who were never slaves need to get money from folks who never owned slaves………
Goodbye and good luck Lefties, you have run the Twin Cities for nearly 50 years and it shows.
Joe, I have hoped against hope that, though you like to come off as a sour old curmudgeon, underneath your gruff exterior was a good and caring heart. But you are ending our time together with yet another finger pointing at us lefties. Really? You’re breaking my heart, brother!
Remember, that finger you’re pointing at me conceals three fingers you’re pointing at yourself.
Alas, I have to let my breath go now.
Geez Joe, some very bitter grapes that you and Ron G are putting forth. How could you stand this place?
“Real Journalism” is going “basement mode?” It still works for you know who – the leader of our democracy. When was his last press conference?
If you want to talk about “deteriorating” and “picking fights,” you ought to read some of your articles.
Nevertheless – I miss the weekly “name-calling” editorials (former writer Eric Black, talk about deteriorating and picking fights) and the name-calling comments.
Free entertainment.
I will still “read” MinnPost and anxiously await if the “L” word is every allowed of a democrat.
Sorry to see this end. Oftentimes found as much content and balance from comments as from the core story. As for the concentration of those commenting, simply limit comments to, say, five per month. Commenters will quickly learn how to pace themselves in the face of scarcity and, in so doing, elevate the quality of their contributions. Please reconsider.
Reading these comments I thought I might post my email response to Ms Dunbar’s email about this. I was not likely one of the top 20 but I’m sure I was in the top 50. You all are free to try and troll me on substack 🙂
As a long-time online writer and for the last year a substack writer,
I am not surprised by this decision. On substack I can limit
commenting on my posts to subscribers, paid subs only, or leave it
wide open. In all my time on substack I have only censored one
commentor, who was an anti-semite. Otherwise those who comment on my
page are civil, thoughtful, and often challenge me in a good way.
https://williamhunterduncan.substack.com/
That said, I think it is sad there will no longer be comments on
Minnpost, even as toxic as it had become. I had suggested to Minnpost
in the past, it would be nice if people could like a comment, to give
some background context, whether any particular comments are
resonating. I tried to be a contrarian to what I perceived as the
commenting Junta, who seem to think being insulting and dismissive is
a form of argumentation. I will not miss their voice, any more than
you will I am sure. At the same time, particularly of late, as
example, your articles in unquestioning support for drugs and surgery
in the name of gender “therapy” for children, Minnesota’s trans refuge
status, needs to be challenged, as the consequence for such medical
intervention is irreversible, sterilization and lifelong medical
issues requiring lifelong medical intervention. If there is no method
of public feedback for such policies, those who control such decision
making can become insular, assuming no one seriously questions their
decision making. I always imagined my comments as a public statement,
in a public square, which is democracy. I was never trying to change
the minds of other commentors, instead thinking about all those who
read comments but do not comment (though that surely happens more at a
place like substack than Minnpost.) I am grateful for that, and thank
you and Minnpost for that opportunity, even as my political views are
quite different from those at Minnpost.
I’m not going to miss commenting on Minnpost, as I only really did to
offer a view counter the prevailing ideology. To some degree too, in
regards to covid policy, Minnpost would not allow any contrary view,
despite now, what was once deemed misinformation is widely seen to be
fact and reality. So I’m not sure what good the comments option is, if
Minnpost can censor any idea deemed outside prevailing doctrine.
All and all it is not a great sign for the health of democracy. But
then neither were most of the comments.
Sincerely,
William Hunter Duncan
Remember, WHD, having your arguments annihilated on their merits is not an “insult”. All the best to you.
Annihilated, BK? You have a very generous opinion about your arguments. Best to you, wherever you land to do your argument annihilating.
I stopped by WHD’s place on my journey to a new commenting destination.
First, a beautiful series of pics of his garden and a bountiful harvest
On to the editorial content where I learned the Maui wildfires were caused by Christian space lasers
My journey continues
A cornucopia of contrarianism.
Best of luck on the journey, Edward. Live long and prosper!
I think your philosophy is showing.
I agree. Being older (65), I’ve lived through the various evolution of communications, and never thought it was a good idea to have general public commenting open to all, even with moderation attempts (impossible, really, considering the volume of commenters).
This is exactly why there never was this type of discourse in writing – the “Arab Spring” was an illusion. We all can’t just “get along”. Out-of-control electronic communication promoted anarchy and declining civilization. And now the next big thing is A.I. What could possibly go wrong this time?
An “all or nothing” approach is rarely the correct decision. I hear the reasons given by Ms Dunbar, and I agree that developing a new approach to moderating comments would require resources & some thought. I don’t understand the apparent effort to sanitize MinnPost to the point of Cream of Wheat. Comments from your readers are too messy to deal with? Democracy is a very messy way to govern and needs the light of day to function even minimally. Comment sections in a publication like MinnPost were often (usually, some of the time, not always) thought-provoking, and I appreciated the perspective added to the article. I rarely commented, but avidly read them. I live out of MSP much of the time. MinnPost has been a valuable resource in keeping up with issues in MN. Sadly, that ship seems to have left the dock.
I wondered how long the comments sections would hang on. It became clear a long time ago that there are a handful of outspoken folks who were taking advantage of the platform to promote themselves as some kind of arbiter on every. Single. Article.…like they were paid Minnpost staff. I skimmed past most of the comments to leave this one, but saw a few of those folks acting like it’s Minnpost’s loss for no longer providing them a free space to repeat talking points they gleaned from elsewhere as if they were original. Won’t miss them, and honestly they need to reconsider the effects of their omnipresence on more occasional/casual commenters before they complain any further.
Those folks lack the self awareness you wish they had.
MinnPost comments educate and sometimes frustrate, but they give me additional ways of seeing things. Eliminating comments diminishes MinnPost, making it less vital, less interesting.
Like most of the commenters here, I also regret that Minnpost has eliminated comments for future articles. I sympathize with the reasons given for this decision; so many people lose their manners when commenting online, writing things that only the most ill-mannered people would say to someone’s face. Full disclosure: Because of my busy life over the last year, I haven’t read Minnpost much, so what I note here is based on my reading in 2022 and before; I suspect nothing significant has changed in 2023.
If you separate the wheat from the chaff, you can learn a lot from thoughtful commenters who have a real diversity of opinions. That’s especially true for media outlets that have a strong ideological lean of any type. Those outlets can easily become echo chambers, and usually the only exposure to other viewpoints comes from commenters. I occasionally comment on the conservative Powerline blog, and most commenters personally attack me for my often expressed low regard for Donald Trump; they also attack the blog hosts who don’t hero worship Trump. There are several left-wing commenters who performed the same negative function on this blog against any disagreement with their party line. That was unfortunate because Minnpost is overwhelmingly a left-of-center blog, obvious from what they cover, the tone in which they cover it, and especially important topics they choose NOT to cover. The lack of respectable moderate to conservative commenters will make Minnpost into a blog of left-wing polemics, with very rare exceptions. Would that an eclectic blog existed that appealed to thoughtful people of varied opinions.
AMEN. Your view is confirmed with mine.
A completely rational decision, from my perspective. It’s been some years since I found the comments worth my time.
Since the majority of my comments never make it past the mods, despite not violating any standards, I am ambivalent about the change. I do know that I enjoyed many commenters and often more so than the actual articles. I will probably read Minnpost significantly less than before.
It’s too bad there’s not a more automated way to handle this. A ChatGPT version of content moderation. By the way, here’s the bot’s take on this (I asked it for 100 words or less of why getting rid of comments was a bad idea): “Turning off a news website’s comments section is a bad idea because it stifles open discourse and engagement. Comments allow readers to share diverse perspectives, correct errors, and foster a sense of community. While moderation is essential to combat hate speech and misinformation, completely removing comments deprives readers of a voice, limits accountability, and reduces the site’s credibility. Open dialogue encourages critical thinking and enables journalists to gauge public sentiment. Disabling comments may also drive discussions to less moderated platforms, potentially exacerbating misinformation. A more balanced approach, combining strict moderation with user participation, better serves the principles of journalism and online community building”.
Congrats on being the first commenter on this page to mention AI as a possible solution! I have wondered about it myself. Nothing available now that I know of but I’m asking around.
You mentioned in the article about a shortage of volunteers to support commenting
Who were the volunteers?
What credentials are required?
I have never seen any reach out for more volunteer help
Thanks
One does not need to be Columbo to connect the dots on this one:
Why end comments? The reasons offered:
1. A lack of volunteers to enable comment moderation.
2. An increase on the perceived deterioration of the quality of comments.
3. A commenting community skewed to the same users, requiring excessive moderating resources for a small group.
Well, MINNPOST refuses to even attempt to solve the volunteer problem by trying to look for more. The maligned MINNPOST 50 seem to have lots of retired folks with time on their hands to do all that commenting and would likely solve the volunteer shortage if asked.
And, of course, finding and qualifying more comment moderators solves the problem of commenting quality as more rigorous moderation addresses comment quality, and likewise, remove the moderation volunteer shortage and there is not a scarce resource problem for moderating comments from any and all.
We hear of “exploring new venues” or “AI could be the solution”. It is too bad that the Editor and Publisher cannot at least show basic truth and integrity in their leadership of MINNPOST:
“We’re tired of the commenting community questioning MINNPOST content and our editorial decisions: We’re shutting it down”
That’s the thin skinned, clear decision here, at least have the courage to own it, instead of specious, red herring excuses akin to “the dog ate my homework”. MINNPOST deserves better from its stewards.
Thanks Edward. reading your contribs these years has been good.
i’ll miss the MINNPOST commenters
These 120 postings (so far) point to the irony that the sum total of poster intelligence is better capable of making Minnpost decisions than the Minnpost directors. At least when it comes to the gaping hole in civic discourse that used to be filled by outstanding op-ed pages in great metropolitan newspapers of yesteryear. And humor? That is another thing to be missed.
From 1-120 it reads like the middle of an epic story where the former rivals and enemies and squabblers and scolds come together to oppose the common enemy of their community. The audience has goose bumps. The clues were there, like in the best of fiction: The flurry of Minnpost headlines that ended with a question mark; the concept of an “audience editor;” increased bickering among posters that was deemed unavoidable for sensitive readers. (Give that man a new mouse.) The foreshadowing of doom.
In a good epic it seems that all is lost, then slowly the protagonists overcome the odds and win the superbowl or whatever. The value of the posters, representing the undervalued cogs of free speech, is recognized by all, everyone in the “audience” (who were formerly known as news consumers and before that simply “the readers.”) and especially the Minnpost directors. That’s just happy-ending fiction.
We are at the moment when the loss of a valued community is nigh and all seems to be hopeless. The future is in the hands of the PR decisions Minnpost has made or will make in how to go forward. Ride it out? Come up with a new formula to engage the audience? Revert to the destroyed concept of “engaged readers” and reinvent the wheel? Stay tuned. There may be a white knight, a wretch with black, ink-stained hands charging around the bend. Are tickets yet available for the pie-tossing booth at the social next week? (What a time to be out of town!)
This trend of shutting down spaces for free public discourse is bad for democracy. So much of our lives are online, but there are so few spaces where we can connect and converse about policy, governance, current events.
The Strib, NYT, WaPo, Slate all require paid subscriptions. Salon and NPR dropped their comments a long time ago. Twitter/X became a dangerous cesspool of trash.
MinnPost stood out as a community forum that fostered more or less respectful interaction – an example of Minnesota’s vibrant civic life. Please reconsider; there are some good suggestions in the comments, here.
– a sustaining member
The idea of MinnPost appealed to me from the beginning. I finally renewed my subscription again a few months ago, because for me, it was time (long past time) to disengage from the national stuff and reengage with the happenings closer to home. I look forward to comment sections for stories that have my interest. Readers often have valuable insight to share.
I’m sure this was a difficult decision. Reader comment boards are the new public spaces, however, and closing down public spaces is not the answer. As mentioned by a couple others, the idea of allowing only a certain number of comments per day seems worth a try.
Does anyone know any free MN news webpages that allow comments? This move silences those who can’t afford to pay websites like Startribune.com.
Sure miss being able to comment! Besides the great journalism of Minnpost it has been educational, intellectually stimulating reading what commenters had posted in response to a story and having the ability to share and engage. My hope is that Minnpost Staff will reconsider their position and reopen the ability for readers to comment again.
Hmmm…
Many of the last few dying comments are from long time members with very few posts (myself excepted, sorry about that, I can’t resist) bemoaning the end of comments.
It is interesting to note that a resource shortage ended comments the same time as Samantha Bee is hired to headline a party celebrating themselves as they also produce articles congratulating each other on their excellence:
https://www.minnpost.com/inside-minnpost/2023/09/minnpost-managing-editor-harry-colbert-jr-selected-for-poynter-leadership-academy/
You can’t make this stuff up: Leadership run amuck with no ability for introspection. Does the Board of Directors care?
This is exactly the kind of pithy post that will be missed. Minnpost? You’re making a mistake. It’s never too late to right a wrong.
“I look forward to hearing from you on this decision (I’m leaving comments open on this page), ”
Long live the no comments comments page!
We could keep this going indefinitely. This could be the open thread that so many of us clamored for.
This is a terrible decision. Minnpost editors don’t like the comments after their articles that point out the glaring holes not addressed by the articles. Thin skinned, top-down decision making, typical of “leaders” in the USA these days.
“MinnPost and other news organizations play a key role in sparking these conversations and connections.”
You think a little too highly of yourselves and your influence.
That is the number one issue with news media these days.
Just report!
Perhaps rather than getting rid of comments completely, you could limit the number of comments one reader can make in a day, week, month, or year. That probably would improve the quality of comments as well.
That would be reasonable and practical, and therefore, is a no-go for the thin-skinned editorial board of MinnPost.
Or, if MINNPOST continues to run “Commentary” articles, limit commenting to “Commentary” articles may be a REASONABLE compromise:
Commenting on Commentary
Especially for the political/lobbyist articles by paid spokespeople like these:
https://www.minnpost.com/community-voices/2022/10/california-car-mandates-have-consequences-for-minnesotans/?hilite=amy+koch
https://www.minnpost.com/community-voices/2022/12/why-large-hydro-nuclear-and-carbon-capture-should-be-included-in-minnesotas-carbon-free-energy-mix/?hilite=carbon+capture
The Minnpost founders created a good news and commentary website, but more than that a community of members enjoyed an avenue of communication via reader comments. I was lucky to have been a part of that community and have contributed money and occasional comments for many years. The current management has chosen to destroy the community it was responsible for — not to mention the free content and sometimes a little humor. Management has not learned the lessons evident from destruction of the Rondo neighborhood: community members have long memories and it is near impossible to recreate a community once destroyed. Is the city of St. Paul better off? Go ahead, prove me wrong.
It was difficult to decide to terminate my support for Minnpost, so I chose to give for another year so as not to punish the paid staff or the readers (the audience formerly known as members). That done, I found ending my continued support was easy. Destroying a community I enjoyed should not be ignored. My recent support will be my last.
Oh for the good old days when a commentary piece from the Koch brothers would be subject to a little due diligence from the now excommunicated commentariat:
https://www.minnpost.com/community-voices/2023/10/why-a-costly-college-education-should-not-be-the-only-path-to-career-success/
Allowing Community Voices Opinion pieces without feedback on whose community and whose opinion voices is a big mistake by the MINNPOST editors that can still be fixed.
I’m late to the discussion, but feel compelled to dissent from the general feelings expressed here, and endorse Minnpost’s decision. While I have occasionally commented on stories, I have often questioned why I do it, and why I read them. Very occasionally, I’ve seen real insights that add to the topic. More often, it feels like unfiltered spouting off that makes the writer feel good (and I include myself in that assessment).
Letters to the editor and longer commentaries, by contrast, require thought and care. And while they still can be emotional rants, they are usually tempered by the medium—and benefit from editorial decisions. There is a difference, after all, between journalism and random gossip. Sometimes it’s been hard to tell the difference since the rise of online commentary.
And I’ve often wondered about the resources needed to provide this forum, used by relatively few regular participants. Makes perfect sense to me that a nonprofit, with limited resources, would direct them elsewhere. As a longtime donor to Minnpost, I’m very pleased that the editors took a serious look at this and came to a sensible, thoughtful conclusion. Shows me the organization is in good hands and my dollars are being well spent.