Herald website - comment opportunities reducing?

Forums › Off topic › Herald website - comment opportunities reducing?

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#198010 22-Jun-2016 10:47

I've noticed recently that the Herald website, which used to allow comment on the majority of opinion pieces, is now almost bereft of that opportunity. Seems to have happened in the last few weeks.

Anyone heard anything about that? Is it a new policy?

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1578174 22-Jun-2016 11:00

Not sure if it is a new policy or not, but I also notice that Stuff website has a "Most Popular" lists, with most viewed/shared/commented list options, and the most commented list has remained blank for several days now.

Damned good thing. It's been very obvious that political parties (plural - it's not just one of them) and probably other "interest groups" have been organising teams of anonymous shills to write comments, the effect of which has not been to increase understanding or encourage rational debate, it's just encouraging group polarisation, intolerance, and division.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12765

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1578175 22-Jun-2016 11:01

To cut down on the nations embarrassment, lets hope Stuff follows suit.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

mudguard

2327 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1250

#1578581 22-Jun-2016 18:12

Maybe it's inline with their massive cyber bully campaign they're currently running.

KellyP

1250 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 115

ID Verified

Subscriber

#1578642 22-Jun-2016 20:39

mudguard: Maybe it's inline with their massive cyber bully campaign they're currently running.

They should do what the NBR does with their Verified commenting system. It may raise the bar.

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9996

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#1578662 22-Jun-2016 21:10

I've never understood allowing comments on news sites.

DarthKermit

5346 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3317

Trusted

#1578666 22-Jun-2016 21:19

sbiddle:

I've never understood allowing comments on news sites.

It's either a source of (very) cheap laughs or a way to wonder at just how stooopid some people really are.

Dyson

Shop now for Dyson appliances (affiliate link).

afe66

3181 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1678

Lifetime subscriber

#1578723 22-Jun-2016 23:13

I was interested to see the recent opinion piece on China's plans for the south China sea didn't tell you who the author was, just their name.

A quick Google revealed the author was the Chinese ambassador to nz, whom is unlikely to have an opinion not reflecting Chinese government. Why did the Herald choose to omit this?

Media watch last week had article on the inclusion of a free 30 pages Chinese news supplement into many Australian newspapers last month, written by Chinese news service which according to university lecturer is Chinese propaganda ministry. Some of the claims within were thought to be potentially offensive to other countries involved in the argument about those islands.

Why the paper was included was a mystery , although Australian media was started moving into China and a picture of people ? Fairfax CEO at the Chinese product launch had high level Chinese politicians shaking hands. Wouldn't be stretching imagination much to see a deal where Australian newspapers agree to including pro China magazine into Australian broadsheets in order to encourage access to China...

But back to nz Herald, why did they choose not to add a note that the author was the Chinese ambassador....

A.

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1684

ID Verified

Trusted

#1578738 22-Jun-2016 23:36

afe66:
Why the paper was included was a mystery , although Australian media was started moving into China and a picture of people ? Fairfax CEO at the Chinese product launch had high level Chinese politicians shaking hands. Wouldn't be stretching imagination much to see a deal where Australian newspapers agree to including pro China magazine into Australian broadsheets in order to encourage access to China...

Actually, Australian media already covered this - a lot of money changed hands!

afe66

3181 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1678

Lifetime subscriber

#1578887 23-Jun-2016 11:10

Im not surprised money changed hands, my gripe was why didn't the Herald acknowledge who the person writing the opinion piece was.

Ethically dubious.

But consistent with my opinion of the declining standards of the paper.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2159

#1578892 23-Jun-2016 11:24

sbiddle:

I've never understood allowing comments on news sites.

You call it the news?

My definition of news is balanced, unbiased reporting. Generally NZ papers produce opinion pieces rather than news, as such.

Unless reporting factual things like car crashes and the like.

gzt

18678 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7809

Lifetime subscriber

#1578916 23-Jun-2016 12:03

afe66:
Im not surprised money changed hands, my gripe was why didn't the Herald acknowledge who the person writing the opinion piece was.

Ethically dubious.

But consistent with my opinion of the declining standards of the paper.

A.

Was this the online edition or the print edition? I've noticed similar previous where additional writer info is included in print but not online.

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

nathan

5695 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1630
Inactive user

#1578925 23-Jun-2016 12:22

afe66: I was interested to see the recent opinion piece on China's plans for the south China sea didn't tell you who the author was, just their name.

A quick Google revealed the author was the Chinese ambassador to nz, whom is unlikely to have an opinion not reflecting Chinese government. Why did the Herald choose to omit this?

Media watch last week had article on the inclusion of a free 30 pages Chinese news supplement into many Australian newspapers last month, written by Chinese news service which according to university lecturer is Chinese propaganda ministry. Some of the claims within were thought to be potentially offensive to other countries involved in the argument about those islands.

Why the paper was included was a mystery , although Australian media was started moving into China and a picture of people ? Fairfax CEO at the Chinese product launch had high level Chinese politicians shaking hands. Wouldn't be stretching imagination much to see a deal where Australian newspapers agree to including pro China magazine into Australian broadsheets in order to encourage access to China...

But back to nz Herald, why did they choose not to add a note that the author was the Chinese ambassador....

A.

The article online says he's the ambassador

"Wang Lutong is China's ambassador to New Zealand."

Did they add this later, after the fact? Or not mention this in the dead tree version or ?

http://m.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11655790