The Seattle Times hasn’t just outsmarted The Olympian with its state budget editorials, but also in the quality of its comment threads.
As a case in point, today’s Olympian’s comment thread to its budget editorial suffers from two problems. First, it is once again dominated by a small group of right-wing regulars who do not reflect the diversity of the community. As of 10:30 a.m. more than 90 percent of the 24 comments were against the Gregoire proposal to ask voters to temporarily increase the sales tax.
Thurston County has the largest proportion of policy-savvy capital insiders in the state. These are folks with intricate knowledge of budgetary and political processes. How is it that on an issue of such importance, they have thus far been absent from the discussion? Instead you’ll find the same old ideologues who seem to camp out at their computer virtually all day, every day.
Meanwhile, the Seattle Times comment thread offers a real debate. Sure, you can find plenty of folks who are staunchly against a tax increase. However, the discussion is pretty well balanced ideologically. Regardless of where you stand, you can see your perspective. Just as importantly, that discussion is policy rich, e.g., debating the merits of a value-added tax compared to the sales and business-and-occupations taxes.
The Olympian’s comment thread suffers from another problem that the Seattle Times has largely transcended: flaming. A big reason why is that the Times tells prospective commentators point blank, “No personal attacks or insults, no hate speech, no profanity.” By and large the threads live up to that credo.
In contrast, The Olympian’s budget editorial thread suffers from the usual high-octane vitriol. For example:
- Djinn says: “The state foolishly built this system of free money for every parasite in the state. Now that the money well has dried up, the parasites and their handlers don’t know what to do.”
- Glenn says: “Anyone that trusts these con artists is a fool.”
- Larry Phill says: “Revenue will INCREASE due to the privatization of liquor. This is from the state’s own analysis. Between 400 to 480 million over six years. I don’t know why people keep repeating the same lies.”
As discussed in previous postings, why would your average, psychologically well-adjusted and politically mainstream reader bother to step into this Jerry Springer-style food fight? It’s just not worth the time and frustration.
So what? As Ken Balsley has pointed out, The Olympian continues to lose subscribers. In another posting I noted that research has found that the level of reader participation in a newspaper often depends upon the competitiveness of its market.
Is The Olympian forgetting that the Seattle Times is a key competitor, particularly with regards to state government coverage? I wouldn’t be surprised if the Times generates a meaningful number of participants in its comment threads from Thurston County residents. And if one spends more time with the out-of-town paper than the local one, don’t you think that might lead to switching one’s subscription?
Christopher Taylor
November 28, 2011
After subscribing to The Olympian for years, I got fed up with the poor quality of reporting (as well as the thinness of the wire content). First I added the Seattle Times on Sundays, then every day, then discontinued The Olympian piecemeal until I am where I am: I get my primary news of Thurston County from the Times, supplemented by local blogs, and the occasional copy of Power and Light and Works in Progress for good measure. I still do read The Olympian online from time to time, but the popup ads and anti-social attitude of the commenters turns me off and makes me stay away. I’d love to have a good local newspaper. But there just isn’t a real choice. And the Times is at least a good newspaper, even if it isn’t particularly local.