MaineToday Media Changes Comment Policy

By Al Diamon

Unnamed unwelcome: For years, the comment section after stories on the Portland Press Herald’s website has been a magnet for the malicious. On any given day, a handful of thoughtful responses to the newspaper’s stories were swamped in a sea of vitriol aimed at the articles’ subjects, the authors, other posters, the Press Herald itself and a variety of unrelated targets. The more controversial the topic, the less likely there would be any sensible discussion.

MaineToday Media – the owner of the Press Herald and its sister dailies, the Kennebec Journal and Morning Sentinel – made a few attempts to keep the discussion civil or, at least, on the subject. The only time that was even mildly successful was when all comments were shut off.

Still, the company resisted the trend toward banning anonymous posters, who were responsible for nearly all the ugliest stuff. In 2011, the Lewiston Sun Journal, which faced much the same problem, began requiring anyone wishing to comment on its site to register, providing a real name and contact information. That information had to be verified before the person could post anything. A year later, the paper’s editors concluded the experiment had resulted in more reasoned discussions, but from far fewer participants. That’s similar to the results on other sites.

MaineToday is taking a slightly different approach. Effective on the morning of Oct. 22, it began requiring anyone wishing to comment on any of its newspaper sites to have a Facebook account.

“Much has been written about how online anonymity has fueled an increasingly harsh level of discourse, with people more likely to be abusive if they don’t face the social consequences of being associated with those sentiments,” interactive editor Angie Muhs wrote. “We think that it’s possible to disagree without being disagreeable.”

There is, of course, no great difficulty in setting up a fake Facebook account. Muhs acknowledged that problem, saying, “Our staff will be on the lookout for that.”

Muhs’ announcement had provoked nearly a thousand comments by the time the new policy took effect. I didn’t attempt to read them all, but a random sampling found most were negative, although few were abusive.

A quick survey of the Portland paper’s website this morning showed that commenting was continuing at what appeared to be only slightly diminished levels. Many of the posters were still using obvious pseudonyms. All seemed to be reasonably civil.

It remains to be seen how long that will last.

Some good stuff: Bangor Daily News business writer Whit Richardson has done a fine job illuminating the complex subject of Maine’s newly competitive electricity market. In his Oct. 22 story, Richardson explains what’s behind the sudden surge in companies offering to sell power to ordinary consumers. The surprising answer: fracking, which has caused a decline in the price of natural gas, the fuel that powers most New England generating facilities.

This is a clear and thorough examination of a complicated issue that directly affects nearly everyone in Maine. Read it before you flip another switch.

Portland Press Herald/Maine Sunday Telegram business reporter Jessica Hall also delved deep into an important issue. In her Oct. 21 piece on the mess Maine government made out of leasing its wholesale liquor business in 2004, she explains the tentative steps the state is taking to prevent a repeat of that financial disaster when the deal comes up for renewal next year.

There’s big money at stake here, lots of players looking for a share of it, and some less-than-reliable watchdogs guarding the public’s interest.

Here’s hoping Hall stays on the case.

Some not-so-good stuff: Press Herald York County reporter Gillian Graham devoted a lot of column inches to her Oct. 22 story on the controversial plan for Sanford to convert itself from a town to a city. Unfortunately, Graham (and her editors) neglected to explain the difference.

Is the distinction due to the elimination of town meetings? She doesn’t say. Is it caused by the creation of a charter? No, because towns can have charters, too. Population? Uh uh. An elected mayor? Nope.

Whatever it is, it should have been in this story, somewhere near the top.

Press Herald staff writer Tom Bell deserves credit for exploring the impact of Maine’s new policy requiring that government research and training contracts go out to bid, instead of being automatically awarded to the University of Maine System.

There’s too little of this sort of follow-up coverage, particularly on subjects that tend not to be at the forefront of public consciousness.

But Bell, while explaining the new method’s impact on the university (layoffs, loss of qualified staff), neglected to provide one obvious and vital piece of information.

How much has the state saved by going to competitive bids?

The announced reason the administration of Gov. Paul LePage changed the way these contracts are awarded is to save money. But nowhere in this front-page article is there any indication as to whether that’s happened.

That’s an obvious — and serious — omission.

Al Diamon can be emailed at aldiamon@herniahill.net.