The Times is now turning off comments on all 'gender' articles

[MiladyBerserko]

The Times continue to cover this issue but now turn off comments on all 'gender' related articles. They do not turn off reader comments on any other topic, except where there is an open legal issue.

I am beyond frustrated with this. The Guardian nailed their colours to the 'Transwomen are women' mast a long time ago and disallow comments.

Now The Times seemingly cannot / will not allow reader feedback.

What is it about this issue that makes organisations run scared?

@Gastonia

PankhurstConnection MarlboroWoman Since the thread was started, The Times has changed its position, and has opened comments. There are now around 1.8K comments under the JK Rowling article, the absolute stonking majority in support of her. I doubt that Janice Turner will feel the need to leave.

I understand that but (this was yesterday so may have been updated) it's only subscribers that can see the comments.

I really dont think it's fair to compare the Times to the Guardian on this issue. THe former has allowed a wide variety of articles and views to be discussed, and has in a lot of ways been a real vector for the public becoming aware of the nuances of the issue.

I also think it's significant that The Guardian has had a habit of disallowing comment on any contentious topic for years. And by that I mean any topic where the readers are likely to disagree with the editorial line, not just ones that tend to degenerate into a morass of nastiness.

But comments can be difficult for newspapers to manage at times, and I am guessing that in some ways these articles were creating work they couldn't keep up with.

I understand that but (this was yesterday so may have been updated) it's only subscribers that can see the comments.

Isn't that fair enough? If you want all the perks, you pay for the content. Or read it at the library.

I pay for the content.

I often share articles here, which is facilitated by The Times. If they choose to allow subscribers only to comment, that is their choice, but it should be apply to all articles (without current legal cases)

@MiladyBerserko

I pay for the content.

I often share articles here, which is facilitated by The Times. If they choose to allow subscribers only to comment, that is their choice, but it should be apply to all articles (without current legal cases)

I agree, I've been a subscriber for years and often share tokens here... but here's the thing.

1( prior to Feb 2022 subs can share articles, comment on sex gender articles. Readers using share tokens can read the article and read the comments
2) From beg to mid Feb 2022. All articles on sex/gender articles had comments switches off. About 40 articles yet we were that this was because 1) legal cases or 2) a sensitive issue
3) As of yesterday the Times opened Up comments on recent and slightly older gender / sex articles.

The MailOnline article reporting Miriam Cates MP p’s statement about schools transitioning children is an example of how they restrict comments.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10614899/Schools-minister-says-need-talk-world-trans-rights.html

Only two comments. One with 2,300 upvotes , the other with 3,500 downvotes.

I've just tried to post a comment saying someone was ridiculous. It didn't get through the filter.

Took the word out and it was accepted.

Yes you can't say stupid either, you have to say s t u p i d and similar.

The AI moderation they use is super-annoying (not sure you are allowed to say annoying, either, although I think angry got through so probably is ok)

@butnobodytoldme

What part of a newspaper DOES interest rich men?

The Financial Times, I would guess. In regular papers, sport and (given Johnson's success) columnists.

Yes you can't say stupid either, you have to say s t u p i d and similar.

The AI moderation they use is super-annoying (not sure you are allowed to say annoying, either, although I think angry got through so probably is ok)

I've posted about their (Open Web) approach as described on their site earlier on the thread.