Irish Times website no longer allowing comments

It's not censorship. Neither the Irish TImes nor anyone else is obliged to give anyone a platform for their views. They did say comments would return in time, we'll see.

Censorship is only at the State level? You absolve the Catholic Church (and all other religions) of censorship - that’s novel!

How many times do I have to repeat that the IT has no obligation to maintain a comment section - but let’s not pretend that this isn’t censorship, even if there are other avenues for comment like Boards. There is no comparison between a comment on the IT website calling out the BS we get from certain commentators (insert names here) and a post on Boards which is only seen by Boardsies.

Will the Commission on the Future of the Media reflect on this? Of course it should but it won’t. It would be rich if the Commission proposes to give taxpayers funds to media which deny the average punter their say.

Oh yeah, RTE.

You are saying that it is a form of censorship to which the IT is entitled ?

In my opinion the actions of the IT do not fall within any definition of censorship.

The job of the Fourth Estate is difficult enough without them being accused of the very thing they work against.

FFS

I post it again, it might sink in

It's not censorship. Neither the Irish TImes nor anyone else is obliged to give anyone a platform for their views. 

How many times must I repeat myself!? No one here is arguing that the IT (or any other media) is obliged to have a comments section.

But when the IT chose to shut down its comments section, that's a form of digital censorship. Maybe you would like a less pejorative term but whatever way you look at it, the IT has chosen to restrict the expression of other viewpoints. It has done so legally and openly and without infringing anyone else's constitutional, legal or natural rights but it is still a restriction on free speech. And well beyond what would be needed to prevent e.g. online abuse.

Boards is a good example of a platform for respectful free speech. I hope Boardsies would be among the first to recognise when free speech is being resricted. I call that censorshhip. Why not?

Yes, Boards censors posts on this site and I totally approve.

There are limits to free speech and Boards generally shows good judgement in dealing with posts in accordance with its own rules which are set out in its terms of use to which all posters have agreed.

If only the mainstream media, including the IT, were not abandoning this approach in favour of a total blackout on readers' comments (except for the anachronism of "Letters to the Editor", which rarely respond to the Opinion pieces that used to attract most comments).

And it's sad to see posters here who don't even recognise the problem.

If I sent you a letter demanding that you post to your own twitter/facebook/linkedin account a paragraph detailing the breakfast I had this morning, I take it you'd do it without hesitation? If you refused you'd be censoring me and restricting my freedom of speech, the same way the IT is apparently "censoring" commenters.

I’ll make this simple - if someone kept posting nonsense on my twitterfeed, I would block them. They might complain that I was censoring them and that would be true but I would be justified in that case. If I blocked all comments from the whole world, that would be paranoid and difficult to justify. It would also be more analogous to the IT cancellation of its comment section.

Of course, my point is that the mainstream media, with a dominant position in the public sphere, have a responsibility to offer a right of reply which they clearly want to restrict I.e. censor.

The IT has chosen to restrict its readers’ capacity to respond on its website. Of course, they can pay a solicitor to issue a writ or go to the Press Council or even write a “Letter to the Editor”.

As you say, not the same thing.

Posters

Posters here don’t like the word “censorship” for shutting down online comments but haven’t offered a better word.

Maybe because they generally dislike official censorship and find it hard to apply any such concept to the digital media. If the government had come along and instructed the media to shut down their comment sections, there would have been uproar but somehow it’s OK if the media as a whole (including the public service broadcaster) do it for their own reasons.

Is there a more acceptable word for restrictions on speech? “Ban” is useful for specific instances (and beloved of the tabloids!) but is it better here? e.g. would you prefer “the IT banned all comments on its website”.

This thread’s title is too obsequious - “no longer allowing”. How gracious of the IT to have tolerated their readers’ views for so long!

'Maybe because they generally dislike official censorship and find it hard to apply any such concept to the digital media.'

It's so easy to create your own blog/web site though. Why do you need the IT to host your opinions?

I don't think the so called "new media environment" has such a rosy future.

Integrity in reporting and commentating will always win out in the end.

Reading anonymous posters "bruising egos" has a very limited shelf life for anyone who really wants to be informed.

People who disagree with you are not necessarily blind to the issue.

You think the comments section on newspaper articles constitutes feedback to the newspaper? Have you ever read a comments section?

I suspect (based on no evidence whatsoever) that the comments suggested that many of the IT’s readers were a lot less ‘liberal’ than the IT’s view of itself and it didn’t really like that. In particular, Monday morning under Una Mullally’s latest masterpiece was always a bloodbath