What a great front page article for Mothers Day. I guess you couldn't find a picture of anyone being run over by a train. I guess you could have saved it for Christmas.

The background of the photo at the top of your blog looks like a pre-digital age newsroom. There is a lot of paper stacked on desks. Do your reporters ever clean up their work stations?

Callitasiseeit- I asked about not viewing comments on my phone- He said I need a new phone- I guess you do to- NOT. Fix it. It isn't our phones duh!

beeferer- will miss you. I agree this all sucks!

Well, I'm not finding much to read or comment about lately. Turn-over is slow and all the good stories are off limits. This has really made a difference as far as the number of visits to the Gazette blog. Pity.

It figures that the small town press monopoly in this circling-the-drain city would make national news for battening down their hatches and restricting reader discussion! That is, after all, the intolerant, small-minded, blue-collar J-ville attitude that I've come to know and loathe over the years. Sad though, as with the Gazette's limited-to-nonexistent investigative reporting, lack of follow-up on hard news, and almost complete ignorance of regional stories and related issue coverage, the comments were the most interesting thing about this paper and its website.

While this certainly is the Gazette's site to do with what they wish, they no doubt will not be up for any "Pullet Surprises" anytime soon based on the rather biased, overly feel-good treacle that is regularly served up here as a substitute for news. I won't be buying any Gazettes or subscribing to the E-edition, nor will I be responding to any businesses who place ads in such a restrictive, backbone-lacking, "newsy/truthy" fluff journal.

Perhaps the management should just consider shutting down this site and folding its "publishing" (obviously used here in the loosest sense of the word) efforts into the weekly shopping rag already under its umbrella of operations? It's little more than that now--some town gadflies, a lot of superficial spoon-fed quotes (rarely substantiated or investigated) from local political buffoons and hacks, a bunch of AP stories thrown in to fill out the newsprint for wrapping fish, washing windows, starting coals, and lining cat litter boxes, so why not just proactively put it out of its collective misery right now and spare the landfill tons of wasted paper?

Perhaps there's a real need (and opportunity) for a on-line wiki-NEWS source in this area that has some TEETH that it can sink into a story or issue. Now THAT would be refreshing! In the mean time, I'll read The Onion On-Line--parody papers are about the only place left anymore where the truth may at least be implied! My "thought and prayers" go out to you, Lord Farquaad and Gazette staff wonks, that you may one day collectively experience the miracle of growing a spine and proudly walk upright as vertebrates in this little Duloc-like land of fairy rings, algae and slime mold. Now THAT would be evolutionary (and NEWS to be proud of). Huzzah!

I have two comments: First, turning off comments because some people can't help themselves and read them is paternalistic, if not entirely absurd. And yes, it's your toy, and you can play with it as you want. Second, Scott did a disservice to readers by wording his comments about the relationship between government and citizens the way he did in the printed editorial ('The government grants first amendment rights, and it can take them away.') Not true! What makes our constitution unique is that these rights eminate from, and reside in the people, who, by virtue of our constitution, gives the government limited authority to govern. Scott disagreed (I appreciate that he took the time to respond to my email), suggesting (my words, here) that it is a distinction without an important difference. It is of utmost importance; however, I failed to convince the editor as to why.

So, someone in Janesville doesn't want to know what's happening in Walworth County. Why don't they start a neighborhood rag mag, then they can put a bubble on their little world and not worry about anything or anyone else. How narrow-minded is that person? We live in Walworth County and like to know what's going on all over, not just my small area. You've already stopped printing most of the Walworth County Court information, please don't listen to small-minded people like the one who wants to live in a bubble.

In a way, requiring the extra effort is a good thing. I've noticed it tends to discourage lazy people and therefore lazy thinkers. Lazy thinkers tend to be the ones who leave the most hostile and most worthless comments.

Present company excluded.

I agree sarahb. I find myself coming here less and less.

That old adage proves true again..."you get what you pay for."

Time to do away with all comments and all free gazetteextra content.

Good move! Less comments in a worthless newspaper blog site and more action taking place in our own lives is what should be happening. Life ain't fair, get over it! Be proactive about something that actually matters!

You can't please everyone.

Sannio - I try to understand viewpoints, especially those I disagree with. In this case, I'm having a hard time understanding the opposition and your post got swept up in that. Sorry. Don't stop with your sarcasm; it usually gives me a chuckle, at least. But when you mix it with seriousness your fans might get whiplash. ;~)

SS,DD (Same Stuff, Different Delivery). I believe the print version of the Gazette will be phased out at some point in the future. The business, however, has survived the invention of telephone, radio and television communication. It will survive the invention of the Internet.

The Gazette has lasted since 1845, despite controlling which Letters to the Editor were published and that Johnny-come-lately, Sound Off. I don't think a little anonymous whining about censorship is going to bring it down now.

If the Gazette is short of cash, it might consider a pay-to-comment subscription format, where consumers identify themselves and pay a fee to be registered commenter on the Gazette web site. Anyone who violated the User Policy Agreement could get their subscription canceled by the Gazette and find themselves demoted to silent readers.

The Gazette might limit the frequency of comments the way they do Letters to the Editor in the print edition. Feel free to write up to 300 characters, one post per month. Perhaps the Gazette might be more generous with bytes, since they are cheaper than paper. Maybe they will allow 300 character comments, once a week, or 300 character comments, once a day.

I just wish the Gazette would list the comments in the opposite order, with oldest at the top, and newest at the bottom. It's a pain to have to scroll to the bottom of the page and then scroll up to read them in chronological order. Most blogs, bulletin boards and news groups flow in the natural way, from top to bottom. You read the original story or post, and then continue scrolling down to view the first reply and continue scrolling down to read subsequent comments. Why doesn't the Gazette do it that way?

Scott
You have done the right thing.
Not Every story or item needs a comment

fool_on_the_hill - I'm not sure how you took my comment. It was supposed to be more of a lighthearted observation boarding on sarcasm. I've yet to learn sarcasm doesn't come across in print very well.
I don't feel the Gazette owes us anything. I have always thought commenting was a privilege, and I was totally blown away when comments were first allowed. I would hope that the Gazette understands their responsibility as a news source to keep it truthful. I think they do.
.
sangus - Same as above. Lighthearted sarcasm I'm trying very hard to avoid. I understand why The Blotter has comments, and I was 99% sure disabling comments on the pot story was an oversight. I think I've gotten better in my content, thanks to these blogs.
I would very very much like to use my real name, and I've thought about it often. However, many of the views I express aren't exactly mainstream ideas, which may hurt future personal business. I write to your reporters using my real name, however, and they've always been very quick to respond, and friendly.

A mobile format and apps are most definitely on our project list. However, we are in the final stages of choosing a new content management system, and it wouldn't be smart to move ahead until we know what we're getting. We hope to launch in spring 2011 - or so.

Scott Angus

The 'click here' feature works fine on my phone (Opera Mini). But generally, the Gazettextra.com site looks like rubbish, because it isn't optimized with a mobile version. I hope that's on your agenda, Scott. (Doing an app is one option, but you generally have to make an app for each major platform, and that's now a total of three, four, or even five apps -- gets expensive. Just do a WAP-protocol version of the website, e.g. at m.gazettextra.com, and you can reach everyone.)

I'm getting trigger finger having to click too many times.......LOL J/K

I believe that the ones who raise the biggest stink about certain stories having the comment option deleted are typically the ones who have a history of having their comments deleted. JMO.

I think that this is a good idea. I rather enjoy looking up all of the latest blogs and stories on my Android, and CallitasIseeit has a good point to make it compatible with mobile devices. Maybe even start to get on an application for these devices? Just a thought

Freedomfighter,
The Gazette's policy is to report accidents only if someone is hurt and transported to the hospital. That hasn't changed in years.
Scott Angus

I too like the idea of the tab to view the comments. However, my concern is why is the "paper" not reporting all the accidents that are in Janesville? Just because few years ago, someone complained about the doom and gloom of the reports?! I think that it should be restarted, but leave out the names of the victims.

I posted and hit view comment and still can't see the posts

you need to make it Crackberry friendly. You can't "click here to view comments".

Ok why are the comments only on the Gazette the ones to be disabled? I click on the story about the 9 year olds funeral and they are allowed on the Walworth County Today but not the Gazette??? If you are going to disable them for one do it for all...don't have a double standard.

I like the added feature...yes, sometimes it is just too tempting when it's right in front of you! Like potato chips...

For everyone who is upset they can't post what they want. Here is a place just for you

http://janesville.craigslist.org/rnr/

Scott,
Both of your recent actions on web comments are appropriate and proper. Keep up the good work.

You can't drive people back to the dying newsprint product no matter how hard you try. Once the boomers stop reading papers they will be all but gone. Most papers are making online content more robust, not looking for ways to limit it.

Mouse, Harlee, TJ, - How does restricting blogs specifically impact the hard copy circulation and revenue for the Newspaper? I fail to see the connection you are trying to make..... I personally have more respect for the Gazette for making these moves.

The comments area the Gazette allows us is a courtesy and NOT A REQUIREMENT. A few of you might want to re-read the User Policy Agreement located above where you enter your comments. You might just want to read the last rule.

I think you should have disabled comments on this blog...just for effect. :)

Newspapers all over the country are failing. Restricting interest by banning comments is about as smart as those yahoos up in Edgerton who wanted to raise hotel room rate taxes to increase tourism. Typical whiney backwards Wisconsin. Way to go Scott. Micro manage your paper right into bankruptcy.

I have been commenting less because the stories posted aren't as entertaining and I know they won't be comment provoking. Yes I have to admit I am entertained by the posters more than the article sometimes. I KNOW the Gazette is a private business, I KNOW they can regulate this site, but as the primary local media source, controling and censoring articles and comments to be a 'nice' paper is expressing their out-of-date conservative stance. It does hold Janesville back Scott. When you don't want to change with the rest of the world for fear of losing a dollar, when as the areas media giant you choose to control how people 'feel' about what they read in your paper or on your web site, you lose in the long run. The up and coming generations are open minded and free thinking and you will lose them in your efforts to keep things the same as they have always been. I agree with deleting the rude and crass comments but not the articles and thought provoking comments. Perhaps it's time to spend the buck to monitor the responses. The good publishers report the news without worrying how someone is going to 'feel' about it. Just my opinion mind you, from my perspective. I acknowledge that I may not be correct, but I enjoy the Privledge of sharing my opinion knowing someone may prove me wrong and I might learn something. I see that privledge being taken away and I am dissapointed in the Gazette.

Another wise move on the blogs .... Kudos to the Gazette.

I'd say give this another day, then let the Gozer Editors pick the most outlandish, insanely exaggerated hyperbole appearing in this thread for a special award. I've made my pick!

I totally understand why the Gazette did what they did. Too many abused the freedom and posted irresponsibly. Take the Lakeland nursing home story...one anonymous person went so far as to accuse some people posting there as being sex offenders themselves out to push their own agenda!

There are plenty of comment boards on the Internet for those that want to be crass, rude, and mean. The JG is not required to be one of them.
As for Gazettextra, it seems that some of the naysayers want to retain their right to weigh in on subjects they no nothing about for the purpose of making inane comments.

Whatever happened to: "I may not agree with what you have to say but I'll defend with my life your right to say it." (Voltaire)

Seems to me that the Gazette is beginning to move down a "slippery slope."

beeferer,

"good bye I am now done with this paper- online or otherwise. This is the last post you will ever see from me."

You probably won't be reading this, but if you do, please remember to start another alias before commenting again so you don't wind up looking like Opinionsforfree:

http://gazettextra.com/weblogs/editor/20...

Opinionsforfree
Nov 8, 2010 at 7:44 a.m.

"Please delete my account if you reading this I will get my censored news somewhere else as the new on this site is a day old"

The following web page has an amusing quote from Clint Eastwood (warning, the page has some "adult" language). Do a search for the word "opinions" on it
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0094963/quot...

Sannio - More often than any other GazetteXtra poster, your comments tend to express my own perspective. I'm not at all surprised we agree on the initial decision to block comments on the synthetic pot story. I strongly oppose using government to protect people from themselves but just how is GazetteXtra doing this? Do you feel we are "entitled" to have a free venue or forum provided to us by The Gazette? Am I missing something? Please straighten me out here...

First they took away the Jews. No one said anything. Then they took away the Jehovah Witnesses. No one said anything. Then they took away the Catholics. Still no one said a word....sound familiar??? At this rate, the Gazette will soon be demanding a book burning.

Janesvillean - Mine takes about 8 seconds, too. Check what happens if you click that clergy link several times in quick succession. I've tested it on a few browser clients. There is no visual feedback; no indication of transfer activity in the status bar; no animation of upper right logo (N with comets, Windoze flag, rotating circle, etc.) while the system hangs. I consider this to be code design flaw and was trying to imply that opinion politely. :-)

Pretty soon in society you wont be able to go outside without a special permit, breathing air will be taxed, fly swatters, stapelers, and cooking utinsels will be classified as dangerous weapons, and communication all together will be banned.

I'm not surprised that the Gazette has taken this step.
IMO,it's long overdue.
Some posters hide behind their screennames,therefore allowing them to say whatever they want.
It's too bad more forums aren't like Facebook(showing the commenter's real name). I would bet alot of people wouldn't be so willing to spew their ugliness on certain topics.
Thank's for adding the additional step,also.

I think banning comments from potentially sensitive stories seemed reasonable and responsible.

scott,
as i think about this a bit more, in your original announcement, you stated that people were complaining that comments negatively affected your reputation (according to the complainers).
if those people now have the option to bury their heads in the sand, why not open up comments once again?
that way those who are complaining are making a CHOICE to fill their heads with the vile we spew at each other.
the onus would be on them -- not you.

hiding comments?
if a tree falls in the woods...will the people complaining not read that it fell?

It's time to take the really big step, Scott. Please ban smoking while posting. ;~)

Hey, I guess as long as the money trail leads you the right direction, rather than allow for healthy debate and discussion-albeit a little heated at times-then who are your readers to say what they want? I don't understand the move to have so few topics comment worthy. The comment tab is a good idea, I'll concede to that, sure. But you're giving some stories a black label...why? Because the discussions were too opinionated? Isn't that why you have the comments in the first place? Seems like an easy out. I feel there were some good discussions, with some good information shared amongst the community. It's the community newspaper, with the community sharing their views and information on the topics. Why on earth would you do anything but nurture the locals trying to share opinions and information, taken straight from the articles and with feedback from the combined might of all our minds? Seems awfully red to me, I apologize for being so straightforward.

The justification for hiding comments is rather ridiculous, but probably won't hurt traffic.

It seems you're using a sledge hammer to remove the tumor. Hopefully you have sharper tools coming.

good bye I am now done with this paper- online or otherwise. This is the last post you will ever see from me.

Mouse,
It's not just about traffic. Our numbers have been and will continue to be more than adequate to support our advertisers and justify what we charge. It's also about the content and credibility of the site. We know that some advertisers and potential advertisers weren't thrilled about being associated with the negative comments that we have now minimized. We and they think that's a good thing.

Scott Angus

It’s interesting to me that the two comments following mine sort of proved my point.

It will be interesting if the gazette is targeted for a DDOS attack like others have been

It will be interesting to see if the Gazette's website will see a drop in hits.

You think you are all powerful you will soon learn a hard reality you might be looking for a job in the future

This only the start. You think your are all powerful you soon will be shown othwise

Something is seriously wrong here. The Janesville Gazette/GazettExtra.com is not the United Sates of America government. Why can’t some of you understand that? It’s a local/semi-cross county newspaper and a private enterprise that ALLOWS us to share our opinions. To me, it is simple; follow the rules or go find another forum. JMO

Big Brother has spoken.

Well, it must be nice to just step aside and let people make the rules for you, and police you. Seems that you've assimilated into the modern community quite nicely, many of you. Much like a dog obeys their master, simply because they are fed and have a warm bed, and get table scraps on occasion when they are lucky. I'm afraid I refuse to be censored and give what I see as my right to an opinion up quite as easily. There's a bit more fight in this dog. Oh, also since everyone claims everyone hides behind an alias;
Tyler Krueger

I have NO problem with the new rules set by The Gazette. Thank you Scott Angus.

The Gazette has rules for letters to the editor and has had them for decades and did people complain about that? None that I know of. Too many of the comments were just plain cheap shots and a method of insulting others without identifing yourself. Comments strayed so far from the article, one wondered if the commenteer even read the article in the first place. Honest and thoughtful comments add to the discussion. If we can't police ourselves, then someone has to. We may not like it, but that is the price we have to pay because of the foolish few.

Silencing the very people you're servicing is a TERRIBLE step! It seems much too conservative. I understand the tab for seeing/hiding the comments. Sure. I also think the statement "More than a few folks have told me they don’t like comments and would prefer not to read them, but they can’t help themselves when the comments stare them in the face at the ends of stories. " just sounds ridiculous. Wow, such a lack of self control you can't stop yourself from all these terrribbllle statements! The humanity! The greatest part about the community reading the stories is the ability to discuss them as a community! Share views, regardless of subject matter. This seems like blatant, conservative censorship. Sure, the gazette has the right to make the rules for this, but I still think the step is ludicrous. A step in the right direction. Really? For what? For the media to put a lid on the community talking about their views? It seems like a tactic that was used in older times to pacify the masses, to keep them repressed. Tab comments seen or unseen, but to disable a community discussion as a whole seems like a terrible, unjustifiable idea. I am simply amazed that we're taking a step back. I'm in utter disbelief. Shame on you,gazette!

Weird... OK my page reads backwards it is showing the posts, but says click here to show, I click , posts go away and then it says click here to hide...think someone got it a bit mixed up somewhere along the lines, unless it is just my page reading that way...

I LIKE this step! Thanks so much for this!

Its too bad. We were talking about this at work today. Yes, people went NUTS commenting on stories, etc, and I can understand you do not have the time to police this thing. But..many of us said, we enjoyed the posts. It showed what a wide variety of people are out there. I know alot of us went on Gazette web at lunch and read the different stories, and the comments after. Guilty pleasure maybe?? Some were funny, some were downright stupid, some were hurtful and mean. But all were interesting. We all admitted that we dont go on Gazette web at lunch anymore. The interest just isnt there. I wonder how many feel the same way....?

Scott, Heard you on Charlie Sykes show yesterday. Couldn't agree with you more. Keep up the good work.

OBTW, Mr Angus. Your last comment was at 6:31pm . . . go home, have dinner, spend some quality time with your family. This will all still be here when you get back to work at o'dark thirty tomorrow!

Clicked. Waited. Still waiting. Says there are 28 comments. Been three minutes. How long does it take?

I was fine with restricting comments on the crime & accident stories, your explanation made perfect sense. But I think that once you did so, you obviated the need for your new "click here to view reader comments" feature. The only stories where I noticed people getting upset at the comments -- as opposed to other reader's viewpoints -- were the crime & accident ones. Adding the "click" doesn't hurt anything, but I don't see where it helps anything either.

Sannio,
Comments have now been enabled on the synthetic pot story. We're still finding our way with the new rules. It's not always clear in which category a story falls. I think the pot story is more of an issue story than a crime story.
Scott Angus

Great idea Mr. Angus. Thank you.

For everyone who feels that the Gazette has restricted their freedom of expression, try:
http://www.blogger.com/
http://www.wordpress.com/
http://www.typepad.com/

Clicking to open the comments isn't such a big deal.
I did wonder why the comments were turned off for the synthetic marijuana ban though. It doesn't seem to fit any "banned" categories. Also, there's "The Blotter" which is all about crime, yet the comments are allowed, which seems to violate your policy.
I think one of the most dangerous ideas is the idea that people think other people need to be protected from themselves. A lot of harm has come from that idea in the past.

I understand that the Gazette is a private business and can enact whatever policies on comments that they feel are appropriate. I also feel like they are wrong to restrict comments. The Gazette, its reporters, and I'm sure Mr. Angus cling and hold tightly the protections of the first amendment. It is the corner stone of our country and the freedom that we enjoy. I know that it doesn't apply to private entities and only applies to the government but it seems hypocritical for a newspaper to toss it aside so easy. It is unnerving to see the press toss aside the very freedom that gives themselves importance in our society.

The comment sections gives the community a place to voice their opinions. It gives a chance for feedback. This may or may not be productive but that should be for the reader to decide. As long as the speech is legal that it is up to the reader or listener to determine the importance of what was said.

As Voltaire once said "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." I actually disagree that not allowing comments will help the community. I think it does more to hurt the community in the long run.

One word - censorship.

I saw a video of Sen. Jay Rockefeller making a statement where he said he wishes that the FCC would shut down Fox News and MSNBC since they are both too extreme for him. Now that would be censorship!
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2...

What's happening here on GazetteXtra comment boards is the owner of the site trying to control the content of their property, not censorship. If some people feel that the rules here are too strict, they have alternatives such as other internet sites to turn to. None of us have any right to post here beyond the terms set down by the Gazette. Conversely, we all can post what we think due to the Gazette's enabling of these comments. It's a pity that some try to browbeat others into silence with incivility, or even without it.

Since the enactment of the new policy by the JG I have noticed that the discussions on most of the boards have been nicer and there is more sticking to the subject of the article. That is a good thing. There also seems to be some 'self policing' as comments that go off the track are challenged.
TJ: Censorship only applies to government. The Janesville Gazette is a private business and as such has the right to set their own rules.

Then how about getting some local stories that we all want to read about....not where the fire is way up north or what happened in Milwaukee...i think that we have that right....

Whoa, T.J.
You're reading way too much into this. Red Square? That's a reference to the communist government, I suspect. We're not the government. Whole different animal there. And I don't equate promoting civility to holding the city back. Quite the contrary.

Scott Angus

Censorship. Let's be a 'nice' newspaper and not let people blog what they're thinking or give their honest opinion. Let's not let readers see the comments and agree or disagree. What if readers thought outside the box of controled media? What if readers learned something? What if readers dissagreed with us? Let's hold back Janesville and keep it the conservative town we want to see. Our friends don't like it. Let's not let technology let the people evolve because we at the Gazette want to keep our paper media selling. Knowledge is power and we don't want the people of Janesville to have too much of either. The Gazette has gone the way of Red Square. Pitiful. JMO

Yes, it's a good idea. Now people who complain about posts will have to take an extra step to be a victim of them.

The question becomes: Was it a clever idea to make it easy for people leave a comment without taking that extra step?

Beware of the abyss. ;~)

I LOVE this option. Thank you.

Your name says it all if you claim to hate political correctness but agree with censoring comments on a small town newspaper website. This feature of choosing to read the comments is perfect. After you choose to read them, there should be no more censorship. I can say it would be very interesting if everyone posted their real names though. Not such a bad idea.

Good move, and the interface seems to work well -- at least on smaller comment counts. (The 1674 comments on the clergy story seem to take at least 6-8 seconds to load on my DSL-based system, which is probably dependent more on the speed of your connection than your browser.)

Ya I posted twice in another section and wondered why nothing was showing up. Its ok, but I think you should allow commenting on everything though.

Very nice job Gazette!!!

johndenver - I think you may be confused. I hate political correctness but complete agree with the sentiments of BeenThereDoneThat.

How about putting your reputation where your mouth is, so to speak. Post your real name, date of birth, address and phone number(s). Then, let the blogosphere work it's magic with a few harmless, fricken comments. ;~)

Kudos on the PR! Karma says, "Be bold, Grasshopper..."

Providing a choice to reveal or hide comments is a good one but it's implementation could be improved. (At least so with my particular browser/system setup.) There is no obvious indication of comments being loaded, which is especially objectionable when the number of comments is huge. I initially assumed nothing was happening, so I clicked the bar again... then, again... and again... and again. I ended up buffering a half dozen show/hide commands, which then seemed to take forever to clear out. D'OH! A few coding tweaks could make this feature a bit more friendly.

Yes, absolutely a step in the right direction. Hopefully this new policy is will bring more truth and civility to the Gazette's online commenters.

BeenThere.....How old are you? Life isn't fair. Luckily, that is why people have the court system and not the gazette website to determine if they are innocent or guilty. It's a fricken comment area at the end of a story. When do you people stop with your poitical correctness? What an ignorant comment.

JohnDenver, did you read some of the reader comments on the types of stories that are now being disabled for comments? There was no "innocent until proven guilty" on the stories involving crimes and accidents. People were put on trial on the pages of gazettextra.com...and that is simply not fair. I totally agree with the Gazette's decision to lock down those types of articles.

It's kinda sad Scott, that some people can't refrain from reading the comments, and then complain about them.
I also "sometimes wonder about the need to protect people from themselves".
There are a lot of turkeys out there...and not all are destined for the Holiday table.

Now this is actually nice........

I think this is a great idea. However, you not allowing comments on certain stories couldn't be any further in the opposite direction of great.

Good job Gazette! Keep up the fine job.

Good move & overdue!