September 25, 2013

"One of the reasons the Daily Beast is struggling to attract readers has to be Troll City: the comments which mar the view of the last couple of paragraphs of every article."

"Your writing is pretty good, Beast, but the quality and intelligence of your comments is at the bottom. The nastiness spewing from these red-captioned paragraphs negatively colors your whole enterprise."

Says a comment to a Daily Beast article titled "Hillary for President...of the Universe," subtitled "Sure, Hillary Clinton could run for the White House. But where the world desperately needs a personality like hers is at the helm of a strong global governing body, says Sally Kohn."

23 comments:

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

I haven't clicked over there to read yet, but ... I can't think of anyone more deserving of massive comment backlash than someone who (a) thinks a global hegemon would be a nifty idea; and (b) thinks Hillary Clinton would be perfect in the part.

On second thought, maybe I'd better not go over there. My comment finger is getting itchy.

YoungHegelian said...

I've got news for the commentor --- comments generally suck everywhere except at highly technical websites where you know the topic at hand or else! Check out any news article, especially if it's on a controversial topic, over CNN or any of the other major news sites. You'll start wondering if the boob-grabbing baboons also get laptops & broadband access at their zoo digs.

Honestly, the extended Althouse community of bloggers (i.e. including the boys & girls over at Lem's) is really one of the best I've found on the 'Net. That's why I've hung around all these years.

And, if that isn't a goddamn frightening commentary on the quality of discourse on the WWW, I don't know what is.

St. George said...

If the name of the publication is "Daily Beast," this should not be a surprising result.

BarrySanders20 said...

Sally sure back-hands Hillary in that article.

Don't run for president -- you're too good for that lowly job!

FleetUSA said...

Wasn't that the line we were force fed for Obama. President of the world, Nobel Peace Prize, walks on water, etc. Look how poorly that turned out.

FleetUSA said...

Wasn't that the line we were force fed for Obama. President of the world, Nobel Peace Prize, walks on water, etc. Look how poorly that turned out.

PB Reader said...

I think some of these people are insane. She's done nothing except damage, yet they want to crown her Empress?

It will be fun watching liberal/progressive heads explode as the failure of Obamacare really becomes known to more people.

They're like the monks in Monty Python's Holy Grail walking around smacking themselves with boards and chanting.

amielalune said...

People are insane. What in the world has Hillary EVER accomplished? I really, really don't understand this adoration.

Bill, at least, apparently has a magnetic personality. She has nothing going for her as far as I can see.

n.n said...

What difference, at this point, does it make? Why are they still talking about what happened yesterday or last week? It's not like someone died or something. It's just a clump of words anxiously hoping for relevance.

Deirdre Mundy said...

I know I heaved a sigh of relief when McArdle abandoned that fever swamp for Bloomberg!

Smilin' Jack said...

But where the world desperately needs a personality like hers is at the helm of a strong global governing body, says Sally Kohn."

Yes, on one of those globes recently discovered orbiting distant stars.

SteveR said...

Typical reaction. The Hillary love can't stand a close look or criticism. This love will carry them through 2024 and who am I to say it won't?

Sam L. said...

Damn good comments!

Sam L. said...

When did DB become a humor/satire mag?

khesanh0802 said...

The "trolls" pretty much have it right. If the article is not intended to be satirical it should have been spiked.

Jeffrey Levin said...

Its not the comments its the stories that are taking the daily beast down.

Jeffrey Levin said...

Its not the comments, its the stories

Crunchy Frog said...

The irony - it burns!

Henry said...

If I read this right, the commenter wants a better echo chamber.

But I wonder if the Daily Beast has accomplished something unexpected. If your product is so insipid/breathless/juvenile that it attracts mostly mockery, surely that can be leveraged somehow.

Maybe this is the business plan. Why be yet another Huffpo slideshow farm when you can be the Abbot version of the Onion?

chrisnavin.com said...

Why, it's almost like beneath much of this is the vision of a global Leviathan with bad incentives and pseudo-famous politicians pulling the technocratic strings.

Hillary for Galactic Peace & Woman's Rights Overlord.

Get your space pantsuits ready!

Michael K said...

It's interesting that they blame "trolls." My comments at HuffPo are routinely moderated and I never see if they ever appear. Most left wing blogs ban my comments. I think left wing sites have a real aversion to opposing opinions. I still comment here, occasionally but moderation reduces my interest.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

YoungHegelian,

Honestly, the extended Althouse community of bloggers (i.e. including the boys & girls over at Lem's) is really one of the best I've found on the 'Net. That's why I've hung around all these years.


Yes, that's so. Comment sections that include intelligent people from all political perspectives are vanishingly rare. Which is why, when Ann decided to cut off comments, my response was "Nooooooo!"

Of course, she stuck that out for about a week, as I expected she would, because she enjoys the comments almost as much as the commenters do.

Anyway, as I was saying, places where you can have civil conversations with people of differing political views are very rare. This is one. The Volokh Conspiracy is one. Megan McArdle's site (now at Bloomberg) is a third.

Honestly, there is not much else; everything devolves quickly to echo-chamber status, and while there are obviously a lot of people who like that, I don't.

Matthew Sablan said...

"I think left wing sites have a real aversion to opposing opinions."

-- You have to think of it from their point of view. They don't see the right as wrong on policy or approach. I think of ACA as bad or flawed policy. The more radical people on the left view stopping the ACA as actual oppression of minorities that will kill people. Once you remember that, silencing opinions makes sense. They aren't trying to quash debate; they are trying to keep you from promoting murder.

Which is a problem, because there are plenty of moderate, open-minded people on the left who don't equate political differences with moral failings. It's why I've given up on the Daily Kos and a few other places I would go to regularly in the early 2000s for a view from the left. They're openly hostile, but not just politically. They think I want to kill people with my idea, and that I know that is what will happen and want it to happen.

Best to abandon Huff Po, Daily Kos, et al, because they're not rational places for discourse.