We’ve recently launched a new feature on Reuters.com that allows users to comment on stories in the U.S. Politics section.
We’ve done this to help foster a healthy debate on the issues raised in those stories, as the United States moves toward one of the most significant elections in decades.
The best debates are those that are lively, substantive and civil — and that’s what we’re seeking here. Please, no profanity or personal attacks, and absolutely no hate speech.
To comment on a politics story you need to be registered with reuters.com. If you’re logged into the site and ready to comment this is the guidance you’ll see:
“Help us advance this story. Provide relevant links or share your insights using our comment box. Reuters moderates all comments so please be considerate and help us by reporting any abuse you find.”
When it comes to reporting abuse we list the following categories: obscenity/vulgarity, hate speech, personal attack, advertising/spam and copyright/plagiarism. If you find a comment objectionable because you disagree with the argument then you should respond with a comment rather than using the ‘report abuse’ link.
So join the discussion and have your say. And let me know what you think of this feature.
Dean Wright
Editor, Media
Trackback
6 comments so far
I thank Reuters for the extension of dialogue on the articles contained on this site.
- Posted by joebhedIf done properly, this type of activity can go a long way to bridge the huge gap between spin and truth.
And, without that bridge, we have poeple making judgements and decisions based on the current spin.
Today i was directed to the reuters site by a link on Kristin Roberts’ story on DefSec Gates’ comments on Iran - you know, all options are on the table.
Except, of course, the number one government option in preventing unnecessary, costly and deadly wars.
Diplomacy.
We have no diplomatic relations with iran.
So, we act through third parties and outside organizations.
I do write a bit on the subject of Iran.
Whernever i can catch a writer directly, no matter who they are, I ask this question:
Why didn’t you ask Mr. Gates just exactly what nuclear weapons program he was talking about?
You know, same thing to Hillary after her Foreign Affairs article.
You would think from Kristin’s article that the two UN Resolutions had something to do with nuclear weapons.
They did not.
They were about enrichng uranium, a legal, allowed process under the Non-proliferation treaty.
They never mentioned nuclear weapons per se, but did the usual abomination of including concerns about long-range missiles that are capable of carrying nuclear weapons.
Unfortunately, it is conventional arms that could be dual use and so we see a stretching of the confiscation of rights under these Resolutions to include perectly legal activities by Iran.
What we really need is a series of articles on Iran - the gist of which should be: “Where’s the beef?”.
Thanks for listening.
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsN ews/idUSN1535252220071016
I have no idea if how your comment system works, however, it seems to be broken to me.
Last night, I read the above article. I was completely disgusted with the outdated, false and misleading information, as well as the fact that the candidate who does in fact have the most web visitors was not mentioned once in that article.
There were 7 comments already posted, and I added my .02. After a few hours, I had come back to this article, and left another post, as my first one had not gone through. This morning, I checked again, and neither had gone through, infact, the 7 that were posted the night before had been deleted. I posted yet another time, and again, it is not up. I did not post ANYTHING that could excluded it from being posted.
In regards to my original posts: this article is wrong. Who ever wrote it used information that was 3 months old. Second, never mentioned once Ron Paul, who has raised over 6 million dollars through the internet. Dr Paul’s supports have been accused of spamming his websites in the past, however it is highly unlikely they spammed 5 million dollars in a few days. Ron Paul maybe low in traditional polls, however, he consitantly wins online polls, and straw polls. Check his website(ronpaul2008.com), (and others that monitor popular websites), to verify this information. A little online (maybe using google)research would have helped this article not be the horrible piece it is.
- Posted by JohnJohn Pringle
Why limit this to just political stories?
Hopefully, this is just a beta test and can be scaled so soon comments can be made on all stories.
- Posted by Jim WintReuters story appearing in NY Times Nov 8 regarding Blackwater crash in Italy.
Can the American public assume that Blackwater is conducting “exercises” with U.S. forces, enjoying free run of U.S. bases all over the world? How is the construction of the Blackwater Embassy in Rome going? I assume they must be constructing one, since though with out a land mass to control (yet) there economic, political, and military presence in the world and Italy must be nearing officaldom.
- Posted by andrewI have to comment here because I am not able to comment directly on the right section.
http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews /idUSL0148043020071201
Probably you will agree that anybody bombing, killing inocent people in the US or against US interest is a terrorist. So do I. And I also believe that ETA is not a separatist group. May be you can say that they are a terrorist group pursuing the independence of the Basque Country. But you should not say “only” that they are just a separatist group.
They have been killing innocent people before any Global War On Terrorism started and Spanish people have been suffering in silence for a long time.
You are supporting ETA and supporting terrorism with this “soft” approach to this terrorist group:
“ETA gunmen shot and killed a Spanish policeman and seriously wounded another in France on Saturday, the first killing by the Basque separatist group in almost a year.”
So, in my understanding you are helping them and supporting the ideology behind and justifying these terrorists and killings.
Most of the spaniards feel your are offending the victims. Just think about this.
- Posted by RaulGiven the creeping encroachment of the international telecommunications industry by American-owned multinational IT corporations, I’m surprised to not find at least one article about the Republican failure to shut off debate on the intelligence reauthorization bill that includes retroactive immunity for providers who gave US intelligence agencies free access to their records in violation of their stated business practices, the statutory governing Telecommunications Act, and the US Constitution and Bill of Rights.
- Posted by ADB