HalfFull

Comments

I think the change in policy to include the real names of individuals posting comments is actually a positive move. When people are firm in their convictions and choose to voice their thoughts in a public forum, they should be more than happy to connect their legal name to such postings. I don't have a problem doing that and from what I am reading here, many others do not either. The problem I have with what The Times is proposing is that it should not take any huge amount of time to convert to the new process. They already have a system in place that requires "real" information. They just need to drop the screen name portion and they would be up and running. The fact that they do not give a definite timeframe for the new procedure is what is disturbing. The timing is highly suspicious as there are many important issues coming up for vote in the near future and it appears the site will not be operational prior to those elections. That is what makes it feel like a form of censorship. If it looks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, it is probably a duck. The Times has forgotten the mission of true journalism, which is to remain objective in reporting the news, not creating or controlling it.

Karla Hunt

April 07, 2013 4:17 pm on EDITORIAL: Vitriolic words online merit a time out
While the Munster High School sexting scandal is big news right now, the hazing abuse on the boy's swim team a year and a half ago, garnered hardly any attention at all. Boy's being hit with a bat to initiate them into the team must be acceptable to a lot of people, but then again, the story disappeared from the forum site very quickly, so perhaps it is not that people don't care, but more that people just don't know the full story. The story was quickly becoming the most popular and it got pulled within a day of hitting the internet.

February 15, 2013 8:57 pm on Munster High students to be suspended for sexting