I’m not big on website comments from readers. I used to think they were an integral part of the new media landscape, a place where the mainstream media member constructing the story and consumer of said media could extend and deepen the conversation that the story spurred.
Now that we have social media sites, comments seem like a fairly useless affectation from Web 2.0, a place where folks who are overwhelmed by “the Twitter” can go and complain about typos. Also, it seemed to create a toxic environment where a once-distinguished brand could wind up being associated with the most pernicious among us.
I’m starting to think I’m wrong about this, though, because big-time media companies continue to place an emphasis on their commenting sections — rolling out new software, encouraging readers to mix it up with the writers, editors, and other commenters.
So I spent the better part of last night looking at comments on stories and blog posts. And I must say, I think I’ve been too harsh on commenters. They are a feisty, thoughtful bunch!
What I discovered, though, was that some websites — most notably the Dallas Morning News’ — don’t respond often enough to the many passionate, grammar-rule-breaking iconoclasts who take the time to comment.
To show these people thanks for engaging in worthwhile public discussions, I chose comments from one story — the one about John Wiley Price’s grilling of Parkland officials headlined, “Firms owned by white women get half of Parkland’s minority contracts” — so that I could give them a proper response.
From “Freedom Fromtyranny”: “non whites get the majority of contracts at airports
now what!!?”
My reply: You’re being rhetorical, yes!!? Because the answer is obvious: now this!!^
From “Magnificent Egos”: “Back in the day it would not have taken a week for the DMN to solve Commissioner Cornrow's problem with Parkland - follow the money. Brother just tryin' 2 git paid.”
My reply: I appreciate this nuanced commentary on how the shock waves from the revenue earthquake that has hit the journalism industry have left the paper with fewer investigative resources than it once had. But I think that’s too reactionary and harsh a criticism of the reporters there, who have done great work in uncovering systemic problems at both Parkland and within Dallas County government. But you misspelled “get.”
From “Anonymous”: “Why do race, ethnicity, and sex need to be considered at all in deciding who gets awarded a contract?”
My reply: Sub-question — why do birds sing so gay? The answer’s the same: fucking liberals.
From “Really49275002”: “JWP isn't going to be happy until everything is all black all the time.”
My reply: “I know, right? He would hate Buzz Bissinger’s red leather pants.
From “William Perlman”: “Given the documented history of how necessary government contracts were awarded, I don't think very many people would disagree with the idea of having goals in the awarding of such contracts to otherwise competent contractors, which would allow those previously prevented from landing such contracts some opportunity to be awarded a contract.”
My reply: PSYCHO ALERT! RING THE CRAZY BELLS! DING-A-LING-DONG!
From “John Spurlock”: “...And once again DFW's leading Black Racist swoops in to try and steal from White people who actually earned what they have achieved (unlike him)”
My reply: No response. Just glad we’ve left Crazytown. (Although, if you cap “Black Racist,” pretty sure it’s “White People.” It’s a style thing.)
From “Freedom Fromtyranny”: “White women!! OMG!!!!!! now no one will dare to argue how wrong THAT IS to target groups … no one will dare to argue that there are not legitimate non whites who can actually do the job … no one will talk about the fraud that accompanies all these racist programs … But the leftists will surround the wagons and keep the corruption $$ flowing”
My reply: Checkmate.
Elsewhere
Good column/post by Jim Schutze on the selective memory of the folks running Klyde Warren Park, who now say they may need public funds to help pay for its operating costs.
I think it's certainly possible that Dez Bryant got pulled into a fake controversy by simply answering a leading question posed to him by a reporter. It’s what happens in pro sports, and it’s bullsh, but it won't end anytime soon. Oh, and calling out Skip Bayless is exactly what he wants you to do. Only makes his evil stronger.
Is it just me, or are the State Fair folks being about as tone deaf as you can be in getting rid of the voice of Big Tex? Oh, so he’s getting a little big for his britches? Number of people who care? I dunno, four? Number of people who think you look evil for sacking him? A few hundred thousand.
I see a nutritionist for The Biggest Loser is going to work for Omni hotels to help rework their menus. I guess this means they rejected my idea of adding tilapia to the CHILI CHEESE NACHOS! [Immediately submits to Jay Leno.]
The awesome thing about this blog update from last night is that Irving acts like it’s a real city. So cute!
Retweets
I get all my Ashley Judd news from Dave Montgomery.
Another TV news update:Ashley Judd's not going to run for Senate against Mitch McConnell
— Dave Montgomery (@daveymontgomery) March 28, 2013I think I’ve been too harsh on commenters. They are a feisty, thoughtful bunch!
