Tennessean's New Comment Policy

[GuardianDevil001]

Evidently Randy Rayburn's widdle feewings got hurt so now you must log in via Facebook in order to post comments to online articles on the Tennessean's website: Tennessean's New Comment Policy

Posting anonymously has a purpose. Once others are able to discover your identity they can at very least harass you online and at very worst stalk you in person. We have (hopefully) all heard about the importance of maintaining online privacy and I hope we all remember this when it comes to visiting the Tennessean's website. The Tennessean's new policy has nothing to do with maintaining civil discourse. It has everything to do with finding a new source of revenue to replace their ever-declining subscriber and sales base.

Your Guardian Devil

[daddyo]

Couldn't have come at a better time. I have been banned from the Tennessean forums more times than I can count simply for stating the truth that little crybabies like Rayburn don't want to hear. What a wimp.

[enfield]

WBIR Knoxville has done the same thing at their website. Since I usually can't get into Facebook, I usually can't comment on the crap they publish. They win, for now.

[Mike.357]

It is all the rage now. I look for the Knox News Sentinel to do it as well. I read the Cincy Enquirer every day and they are doing it too.

I refuse to be strong armed into using Facebook. One should be able to remain anonymous. Some of the countries greatest founders wrote under pen names.

I am assuming Gannet and Scripps invested in Fb.

Facebook is becoming a mark of the beast.

[daddyo]

Set up an alternate FB account with a fake name.

[Steelharp]

Posting anonymously has a purpose. Once others are able to discover your identity they can at very least harass you online and at very worst stalk you in person. We have (hopefully) all heard about the importance of maintaining online privacy and I hope we all remember this when it comes to visiting the Tennessean's website. The Tennessean's new policy has nothing to do with maintaining civil discourse. It has everything to do with finding a new source of revenue to replace their ever-declining subscriber and sales base.

Your Guardian Devil

Well said, and while I see that side of it and agree, I also understand that if I have the belief in my convictions that is strong enough to say something, I am strong enough to stand behind it.

[Mike.357]

Set up an alternate FB account with a fake name.

Fwiw that is against fb's tos.

I used to use FB but got rid of it. I did not like it.

[Guest WyattEarp]

Fwiw that is against fb's tos.

I used to use FB but got rid of it. I did not like it.

same here, i had a couple friends (that didn't know each other) who got into a heated debate over a link to a public issue I posted that was controversial and they got into it and started threatening to shoot each other. after that I said that's enough, and permanently deleted it. life has been much more productive since i've not been on there.

there's more to life than facebook and sitting around checking everyone's statuses, i have tons of wonderful digital animation software that I'm learning.

[Mike.357]

What cracked me up about Fb was people i knew years ago all the sudden wanting to friend me.

Never in 20 years got a phone call or xmas card but now they want to know all about me.

Most of them i was glad they never called. LOL

[daddyo]

Fwiw that is against fb's tos.

May be, but FB is replete with fake accounts, so they obviously don't police or enforce it.

[Garufa]

Comments on news websites should be banned altogether.

[Guest midnitelamp]

Somewhere on the Gannett Blog,an anti-GCI site says that after the Cinncinatti paperwent to the Face Book format,that hits on the site have decreased greatly.

As anti-gun as Gannett is,I don't understand why any gun owner would subscribe to any of their papers. Going to the web site once a day is all I can stand,and that is to check the obits,which are not written by the staff,thus they are the only part of the paper to be trusted.

[Mike.357]

Somewhere on the Gannett Blog,an anti-GCI site says that after the Cinncinatti paperwent to the Face Book format,that hits on the site have decreased greatly.

As anti-gun as Gannett is,I don't understand why any gun owner would subscribe to any of their papers. Going to the web site once a day is all I can stand,and that is to check the obits,which are not written by the staff,thus they are the only part of the paper to be trusted.

The Cincinnati Enquirer and Cincinnati.com will require Facebook to log in for comments starting on Dec.5, 2011. I read it daily, sports page mostly. I am sure they will take a hit on page views. People who comment go back to the comments to see if anyone responded to what they said. Very much like how it works here. If I can't comment on a story there is no reason to go back to that story several times, therefore their page views will drop like a rock.

Even though page views drop and I suppose advertisement income will drop, Gannett will glean user info from FB accounts as a way to recoup that money. I am sure in their business plan they believe they will come out ahead financially.

Cracks me up that they do this change claiming it will make their comment section more civil. Stuff like this is never about manners, always about money.

As for liberal bias in newsprint and their accompanying websites, people are creature of habit. I bought newspapers every morning for 30 years. I did not care about liberal or conservative bias, I bought them to have something to read in the morning and to keep up with news and sports. As well as the daily crossword. If you are a newspaper junky as I was it is a hard habit to break.

I thank the worthless Knoxville News Sentinel for helping me kick the habit. High prices and crappy reporters, as well as getting it free on the internet got me off of newspapers.

Of all the newspapers I ever read daily I really miss the Chicago Tribune. I don't care about their political views, they had a great sports section.

[Guest WyattEarp]

well, I don't think you can find a bigger example of an oxymoron in which the median through which the First Amendment is primarily channeled to millions of people, is doing their best to limit the very freedom they frequently run to court to sue over when it is infringed upon against them.

I believe this tactic is called "self-defeatism"

[Guest midnitelamp]

Mike357,I know what you mean.

Our family got the morning paper and the Nashville Banner before I was born. I even looked for the Banner street final Read any newspaper I found laying around,the defunct Press-Scimitar,Chattanooga free press Louisville Courier Journal,etc.

With sadness and reluctance I dropped the Tennessean but without regret.

[Guest bkelm18]

Comments on news websites should be banned altogether.

Yep. 99% of the time they contribute absolutely nothing to the story and usually just end up in pissing matches.

[Jonnin]

Its really annoying -- I refuse to make a facebook account, I will not have anything to do with it, but a lot of sites assume you have one. The idea is kind of nice but I do not trust them with my name or image -- just this past week they let their private photos out to the public in yet another failure of their low quality security measures. I suppose I could make a bogus account, but I havent bothered with that.

[mcurrier]

Comments on news websites should be banned altogether.

Do any actual 'news' websites even exist anymore? Seems that 99.9% of them have a skewed agenda.

[Garufa]

Do any actual 'news' websites even exist anymore? Seems that 99.9% of them have a skewed agenda.

No. Most of them are just places for people to offer unsolicited and often infuriating opinions.