Thursday, January 05, 2006

No comment

Jessica McBride explains below why she doesn't allow reader comments on her blog. Wonder if Sykes has the same excuse?

And here I thought it was just because they were both thin-skinned.

Comments on the blog?

A couple times a week, I get emails from readers asking why I don't allow comments on my blog. Sometimes, I am tempted. This is why I don't. I have absolutely no problem with constructive criticism and insightful opposition. But, if I put comments on my blog, I would be called vicious names by angry reporters and liberals and people with an axe to grind against Paul - you name it. Why should I give over my space to that? I've read the comments on other blogs and they get really vicious and are often downright slimes against a lot of people - sometimes even veering on libelous.

For libel reasons, I prefer to control the content on my blog. I attended a blog seminar where a lawyer was speaking and she said bloggers are actually in more dangerous legal territory if they delete some blog comments - even if they worry the comments are libeling someone - because then they are perceived as the "editor" of them rather than the passive recipient. So they are sort of stuck. I might consider eventually allowing non anonymous comments. That might be a compromise down the road.
UPDATE: Thanks to Owen at Boots and Sabers for pointing out that I had not allowed comments on this post. Jay Bullock gave me credit for irony, but it was really stupidy. Just an oversight. Comments are on now; hoping to hear from Sykes and McBride.


At 3:53 PM, Blogger steveegg said...

I don't think that having an e-mail address available on the blog in lieu of a comments/trackbacks section is exactly being thin-skinned. It still allows commentary to flow back to the author; it just isn't (necessarily) public.

Full disclosure - While I do have comments enabled back at No Runny Eggs, I do not publicize my e-mail addresses because I don't want to deal with the spam.


Post a Comment

<< Home