After 100,000 comments on Mumbrella, I’d like to know: what do YOU want?
So today, we hit a milestone.
I just approved our 100,000th comment.
It was this one from “Ralph”:
“I’m Idaho!”
(I now slightly regret tweeting that we were a couple of comments away from the milestone, as I asked for it, but it does rather nicely sum up the the sense of humour of Mumbrella’s posters.)
We noticed a few weeks ago that we were about to hit 100,000 comments. Internally, we had something of a debate. Should we launch a new moderation policy? Should we let the moment slip past? As it happens, we updated Mumbrella’s community guidelines a few weeks ago.
The truth is, I often feel conflicted by our comment threads. They show Mumbrella at its best, and at its worst.
At its best, when we get intelligent, reasoned debate and explanation from people who know far more about the topic than us. I believe that a big factor in Mumbrella’s success when we launched into a crowded trade press landscape nearly four years ago was the comment thread. It wasn’t a big part of the plan, but letting people easily comment became a big point of difference.
Even when we switched to pre-moderation a few months later because of legal risk, it remained powerful.
It’s at it worst when people get too angry, too abusive or too stupid. My heart sinks when we get mindless attacks on ads that probably come from rivals. Or mindless, and irrational, praise of average ads probably coming from the agency that created them. Fair to say that advertising work is what tends to bring out the worst behaviour in the comment thread.
An issue we often grapple with is what to moderate. While the vast majority of submissions are approved, there are a large number every day that are not.
We tend to take some flak from both sides. People who feel – sometimes rightly – there are comments published that let us down. Sometimes they slip through, sometimes it’s a judgement call. It’s not a full defence to simply say: You should see the stuff we don’t publish. But blimey, you should see the stuff we don’t publish.
We try to have a set of rules that the three or four of us who moderate can apply consistently. But of course it doesn’t alway work, and you can – and do – help by pointing out in the thread when we get it wrong.
The problem for us is often one of telling the difference between honestly held opinion and a vendetta. I can think of one agency – and its creative boss – who almost always attracts vitriol, which we don’t publish. I still have no idea whether the attacks come from an individual clever at hiding their IP address, or this person really is widely disliked. I don’t quite dare ask him.
Opinion is also divided about whether we should tighten up our rules of commenting. For instance, should you be forced to put your real name to comments? I fear that would lead to the loss of intelligent commentary, as well as the mindless minority it’s aimed at.
Or should we ask people to register with us, but allow pseudonyms publicly? My resistance there is more around practicalities. On sites wehre I occasionally try to comment I find it a complete pain in the backside because I’ve generally forgotten my password, and can’t be bothered to dig it out, so I end up not commenting.
Or should we continue to simply allow free access and continue to moderate? Or apply more of a value judgement? For instance, not allowing comments unless we think they’re clever enough? That seems a tough judgement call, and one it would be hard to be fair around.
So rather than simply tell you what we’re going to do, I thought I’d ask you, Mumbrella’s reader (and commenter): What do you want?
We’re listening.
Tim Burrowes
Linkedin
If it ain’t broke…
User ID not verified.
First, Mumbrella has a better standard of debate that most sites.
Second, its still in the gutter plenty often.
Third, the fact I’m bothering to respond means I’m invested in the place at some level – your doing well overall.
My number one priority would be to deal with dishonest commentary. Far too many comments getting through without people disclosing that they are from a rival/have a commercial interest/are Joe Hildrebrand’s drinking buddy ect.
As Tim has already pointed out there are some significant challenges with policing this. However I fear that over time the number of dishonest comments is going to increase and “slapping them down now” is better than trying to fix it later.
One suggestion is to simply not publish the sloganeers/cheerleaders. Stuff as short and brainless as “Love this” or “I’m for team Matt” or “Gillard out” ect shows that the commentator really hasn’t made an effort and is probably a cheerleader in the office ect. Getting rid of uber short posts (and uber short opinion pieces for that matter) could be beneficial. If you force people to use that tiny percentage of their brain required to turn a 3 word slogan into a 12 word genuine sentence you might get rid of some of the cheer squad.
The second priority is abuse. Not because the bad language offends me – but because thoughtlessness offends me. If you can’t make a point without resorting to abuse, go away and learn how to before you join the grown up discussion.
User ID not verified.
Status Quo.
And I ain’t talking about the Coles campaign.
User ID not verified.
A comment thread about comments? How meta!
Your current policy seems to work well, keep it up.
User ID not verified.
Intelligent moderation is the key. If there are suddenly lots of comments praising some dreary social media campaign, selectively impose greater challenges on those comments. Or just delete them.
With long threads like Joe vs Matt, apply some filtering so that only the best contributions are displayed. There were a few that stood out for their insight.
Forced registration is a bit of a killer, even if it’s a great idea in theory.
User ID not verified.
Seems to work just fine as it is, to me.
User ID not verified.
Si non confectus, non reficiat
User ID not verified.
Stop people writing essay’s…maybe a word count restriction…
User ID not verified.
dont think you can delete a comment based on it being short – some people just use fewer words, doesn’t make their opinion any less valid.
agree with the above – intelligent moderation is the way to go, so keep doing that. however, im in favour of embarking on a the registration, log in, comment, as per most of the online comment functionality works these days.
dont think forgetting a password is really that much of a barrier to be honest – it’s easy to retrieve and most times you can ‘remember’ it on your computer anyway.
of course you’ll still get people using a pseudonym, but the fact that they have to put that to an email acts as far more of an incentive for them to be more mindful of how they conduct themselves online.
if they are being dicks – as per your new community rules – then ban them, that way you weed out the trolls and the angry people leaving those with valid and constructive opinions.
sure they can resign in with another email, but the hassle with doing that multiple times will soon ensure that they end up clearing off.
forcing people to have the same name in all their comments also means its easier to spot patterns so if they are continually attacking someone or bigging up someone else, then it shows.
honestly think this is the way to go
Also, means you can build up a well stacked database of interested mumbrella readers to work with!
but yeah, you guys do a good job on what is a pain in the ass task – so well done
User ID not verified.
I’m very partial to DISQUS, which a large majority of sites are using nowadays. It allows you to have a profile, get specific replies to your post and get notification for those replies. Some sites even require you to have a registered email in order to post. I appreciate the work you guys do when it comes to comment moderation, but I imagine your time could be more well spent and an automated comments system would allow greater discourse that’s not reliant on the start stop nature of moderation.
I do like anonymity when it comes to posting. Especially in an industry like this, it allows people to be honest without feeling worried about retribution.
User ID not verified.
Keep going as is Mumbrella. I think people will comment if the issues you’re putting forward are worth commenting on.
Now, if this site is getting to the point that the devil’s trollers are winning the comments section and those with genuine intent to advocate their views are being drowned out, then you may have a bigger problem (eg Gawker). But I don’t see that on this site. Admittedly, this could be because your patrolling system is very thorough already.
User ID not verified.
My cats breath smells like cat food.
User ID not verified.
Tim,
Out of all the websites I visit, I find mUmBRELLA to be the coolest by far.
It is the one site I would bother to comment on.
A comment is based on an opinion. Of course there has to be a limit, and people should be aware of that limit in a public space.
@goodone I don’t think a ‘word count’ should be implemented. If people have the need to express themselves, they should not be constrained by that.
Maybe get some volunteer moderators who have the power to remove pointless posts?
User ID not verified.
I love being able to comment so easily.
User ID not verified.
Well, I recently witnessed what started as a serious discussion on one issue on here descend into madness and went with it, thinking “there’s no way these comments will be approved”, but they were – and I kinda respected you guys for letting it all transpire.
It may not have been exactly an intelligent discussion but it was funny, brightened my day having a hilarious interaction with an anon – and it was not harmful to anyone.
So… I think you should only moderate where something is spam, or where someone is being viciously attacked. Other than the times when the sitch turns into internet bullying, isn’t it all just fun and games?
User ID not verified.
I think it would be great to have a combination – maybe for regular posters you could offer an Umbrella in their comment indicating that they have somehow been verified or their previous comments were deemed intelligent.
User ID not verified.
While there are some stupid, biased, propagandist comments – I think there’s a lot less as a percentage than most other sites. Vast majority are vaguely interesting. Large minority offer real insight. Keep it up!
User ID not verified.
Have an Unmoderated Comments Day once a year.
Because “But Blimey” I want to see the stuff.
It will also, hopefully, make people thankful that you do moderate the other 364 days.
User ID not verified.
You do a good job. For those of us who don’t mind using our real names can I ask that others consider doing so; it is not Russia and you’re not Putin critics so feel free to be you! One comment I would make Tim is when you send out a ‘sponsored’ email (like yesterday’s) I feel you owe it (literally) to the paying client to put their name first – I hope many scrolled past your coy note about how you will spend the fee. What interesting times we live in where you feel you kind of need to almost apologise for making some money from your skill and database. i think most of us are cool with the fact that you can! Good luck for the next 100,000
User ID not verified.
Perhaps moderators could quickly rate each comment by giving either the “thumbs up”, “thumbs down” or “thumb sideways” as a quick guide to whether a post contains the type of commentary Mumbrella values on its site.
After all, newspapers publish far more selectively and many, such as SMH’s Good Weekend, nominate a “letter of the week”.
It might save people from reading the less edifying comments and encourage posters who habitually resort to abuse and condescension to lift their games, potentially make life easier for moderators all without increased (other than self-) censorship.
Given the level of abuse tolerated already, I was surprised to learn that around 10% of posts transgress standards even more than the worst of those published (presumably by being outright defamatory).
User ID not verified.
Hey Tim and team.
Do you have enough comments that didn’t make the cut to be able to make a quirky little book, which you could sell? “What we didn’t publish” – a book by Mumbrella…
Or if the unpublished comments are that bad, then scrap that idea and perhaps in your next yearbook, publish some of your favourite / funniest / most intelligent / most influential / obviously biased comments of the year. If comments engage your audience and add substance to your offering online (they do), then get the pick of the bunch and enhance your print offering too 🙂
Feel free to send me a free draft copy when actioned to give you some feedback before it goes to press 😉
Keep up the great work!!!!
User ID not verified.
I would personally hope for no registration system ever. I couldn’t tell you the number of times I finish reading an article on any news/blog/what-have-you site, go to write a comment, get that god-forsaken ‘Have you signed up/logged in? Well, have ya, have ya?!’ box, and banish my would-be comment to the back of my brain.
It’s not even so much about forgotten passwords as it is about having the online equivalent of a burgeoning keychain that stopped fitting in your pocket long ago.
User ID not verified.
It should be compulsory to have your real name next to your opinion.
User ID not verified.
Trust your readers to be responsible and be confident you’re not providing a platform for a public slanging match. Whatever you choose to do, DO NOT,whatsoever, as much as it pains you, start a campaign called #stopthetrolls…
User ID not verified.
I love how easy it is to leave a comment here and I love reading the debates that ensue.
Because it’s easy to comment and because it’s a popular site, it probably attracts people making mindless/thoughtless/stupid comments too, but when that happens, I love how the community usually rallies and rights the wrong, is a voice of reason and/or defends the attacked.
Evil triumphs when good men do nothing and good people are still doing something, so can we keep it as is?
User ID not verified.
I think the idea of registering, but under a pseudonym (or several) has merit. It means you can comment with some anonymity, yet anything that crosses into slander or astroturfing could be easily moderated, and traced.
User ID not verified.
Let people vote up comments they like. The crap tends to sink, and the good stuff floats to the top. All are still shown (as per the current guidelines) but people can filter by top rated comments. Rather like they do over at http://www.guardian.co.uk
You don’t need to have downvotes, but upvotes only do tend to give people feedback and encourage thoughtful responses, whilst also negating the need for a “yeah, i agree” post.
In addition the ability to vote up or down the actual article will provide feedback for all.
User ID not verified.
Blue, I like the idea of the upvotes – but if they rise to the top, how do you follow the threads/order of comments?
User ID not verified.
Forget about comments or any other website enhancements until you build an m-site.
User ID not verified.
@Crizza – As someone above mentioned, Disqus can show replies/nested comments, and also you can choose to order by newest/oldest/top rated.
User ID not verified.
Up votes? Nah
Simply keep it as is and moderate internally as you are doing.
Mumbrella is an example of successful publishing in 2012. It isn’t really about the technology, it is about the content and ease of use. I don’t get offended on Mumbrella by ad’s popping up, or video’s starting automatically etc
Anonymity is a good thing and encourages people to have their say v scaring them off with sign up walls.
I don’t have an ego, I am not narcissistic and therefore do not want to reveal who I am. Rather like many famous writers had pen names / aka’s.
(I am not a famous writer btw…)
User ID not verified.
When I sign in to Amazon, I seem to be logged in permanently, so no need to remember passwords. If that’s an easy feature to implement it could be an idea. Still public anonymity though
Perhaps a “like” button which ensures the best comments are on top, or something that makes it easier to flick through a long thread as per above suggestions.
A way of making it easier to follow sub-threads. If I want to comment on a point made 70 comments earlier, few wil bother to find the original one, plus the original commenter is unlikely to see my comment and respond. So more of a forum structure perhaps
Keep up the good work and good luck!
User ID not verified.
Bravo and congratulations Mumbrella.
This is one of my new mottos: “Wherever you have a secret, that’s where you’re vulnerable”. (More here: http://thepunkrockshop.tumblr......here-youre)
So I’m a fan of transparency (and therefore against anonymity). It’ll weed out the trolls and lean the community you’ve created towards rational and constructive conversation.
User ID not verified.
Personally, I hardly ever read the comments. I am on the site to read the articles, and in fact this is the first comment I have posted. So, I am happy as long as you keep the spammers out and the content relevant.
User ID not verified.
Firstly, thanks for asking.
I agree the comment section made all the difference for Mumbrella when you launched. Reading the comment trail became more than half the fun.
However, lately, I’ve heard a few murmers to the contrary as industry people I speak to think the comments are skewed towards the negative and therefore not representative.
For that reason (as well as the general push away from online ‘bullying’) I vote for all of us using our real names.
I think the debate would shift – maybe the number of comments would drop off a bit but I think the readership would probably increase.
You could reserve the right to hold back the identity of some people on request if there is a genuine reason they need to be anonymous.
User ID not verified.
It works because it’s annon or transparent at user choice not mandated. It works because its simple. It works because its moderated by moderates who allow colour & movement to get through. Do not convert to discus or livefyre unless you investigate deeply the consequences of the change in mechanics. Get advice from others who run large communities. Us users can’t help any because we don’t know first hand what you actually have to deal with. Read The Lean Startup for tips on filtering out noise and what’s important from user suggestion when improving features.
User ID not verified.
Only men should be allowed to comment
User ID not verified.
Do you think mumbrella gets less stroies and press releases because people & businesses are scared of the comments?
User ID not verified.
Comment system works fine.
My only suggestion is to add ‘like’ and ‘dislike’ buttons & counts to every article & comment. It reduces the ‘I agree’ & ‘I disagree’ comments you need to manage and provides a way for people unprepared to comment to interact and can encourage them to become more involved in conversations over time.
It can also be a useful datapoint during analysis.
User ID not verified.
I agree Craig!!
Sometimes I just want to let you guys know that the story/article/opinion piece has really made my day or coffee break. I enjoy nothing more than a quick time-out catching up with mUmbrrella and what’s happening in the crazy world of marketing and media today.
I think your comment system is great and why fix what’s not broken but sometimes people do get carried away and add a thesis length comment when all they really needed to say was ‘I liked this’……….as I have just done!
Add a ‘like’ button and you might find that more people than you think are reading your stuff, but just happy enough to give it the thumbs up without without adding their meaningless opinion!
User ID not verified.
Toko-roa mata-mata waihi papa-kura pauanui.
… If you can eat the bloody mutton bird, don’t change the recipe.
The only thing the whole site lacks is a forum where we can see a great ad on tv
and be able to get on next day and give it a rap. Many aren’t listed in New Campaigns. It’s fine to trash the crap but it would be good to also have one place to encourage the good and the brave.
User ID not verified.
You can have voting without having to use real names. That’s the middle ground I’d choose. An interesting article on it here – http://techcrunch.com/2012/07/.....-comments/ and here – http://techcrunch.com/2012/01/.....seudonyms/
Funnily enough, Techcrunch themselves moved to introduce Facebook only comments. Here’s a post about that – http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/.....-comments/ – unsurprisingly when they went to real names only (OK, Facebook names) most comments went to gushing praise rather than real criticism.
I’m sticking with my suggestion that a voting system and allowing people to register with a pseudonym if they want, or to be anonymous, is the best way. Indeed if we had the ability in this thread, you’d be able to see which comments were the popular opinion among the masses.
User ID not verified.
Like the idea above about publishing a little book with selected comments.
I’m assuming he means just my comments. I don’t read anyone elses.
User ID not verified.
Congrats Tim and team! Mumbrella is still my favourite daily read after all these years.
I’m thirding the recommendation for Disqus – it’s widely supported and covers a lot of other great suggestions like comment threads, upvotes/downvotes and support for verified (real names and pseudonyms) and anonymous comments.
A mobile site would be great too!
User ID not verified.
@Rushdie
Bloody oath!
User ID not verified.
Fleur,
Know it is not your view, but there’s a fallacy in the thinking that “most comments are negative, therefore no representative”.
Whether or not comments are mostly positive or negative has no correlation with how representative they are. Comments simply represent the subset of views from people who decided to comment (and may not even correlate with the group who read the actual article – some people comment without reading).
People seeking the mythical state of ‘balance’ – where viewpoints are expressed in exact proportionate to the wider public’s beliefs on a topic, or based on the facts of a situation (take your pick – the two ways of achieving ‘balance’ provide radically different outcomes), should not read comments on articles. Indeed they should not bother with media at all.
Perhaps to assage the fears of those poor companies who fear criticism, it would be useful to include colour coding of comments based on whether they support/oppose or are neutral towards the article and provide a filter mechanism for them so they need only view the positive comments.
User ID not verified.
Current process is working well. It’s quick and easy from a reader’s point of view.
User ID not verified.
I like being able to comment freely and I try to censor myself as should others. Having to list my name might stop me from having an opinion because I work for “da man” and he may not want me expressing my opinoon publicly lest it reflect on him.
Plus I read the comments for fun often and any kind of change might make this hard due to less comments and less funny comments.
Agree on no essays. I skip those comments – who has the time?
User ID not verified.
More of the same please…………..
User ID not verified.
I have said this before but I find the comments / commentary on Mumbrella very negative. I am all for robust debate that is backed up with thinking but too often we get comments on here like “marketing fail” and “crap ad”. This shouldn’t be allowed – it’s counter productive and negative. Sadly I sometimes think this is lead / encouraged by the editorials. E.G when Tim posted about a PR campaign that caused wood chippings to spill on his desk it then spiralled into a heap of comments about how the campaign had failed for no real reason other than the fact that Tim had chippings on his desk. Makes no sense? I think this should be a place for intelligent / industry debate and this should be lead by Tim and his team of reporters.
User ID not verified.
@ Sarah (comment 50)
That is a very negative comment Sarah.
User ID not verified.
Let us rate comments (out of 5) like you can on trip advisor or provide a login facility (optional) that can show you people who actually come back and comment multiple times. Win for all here….
User ID not verified.
Comment of the month or week; announced by Mumbrella would be quirky.
You should also have a shop where people can buy Mumbrella mugs, t shirts, stubby holders, pens. Winner of comment of the month, receives the lot.
User ID not verified.
Whats a “book”?
User ID not verified.