Does the Daily News need help moderating the comments on their website? From a story about a horrific spate of murders Christmas Eve, these beauties:
BLACK ON BLACK CRIMES. 80% OF THE CRIMES COMITTED AGAINST BLACK PEOPLE IS CAUSED BY BLACK PEOPLE. MEANWHILE, WHILE THE DUMB BLACK OR LATINO ARE KILLING THEMSELVES, THE WHITE MAN IS LAUGHING HIS TAIL OFF.
. . .
Darkies can’t even celebrate Christmas without f-ing it up. Stupid savages.
Both of those comments are on the page 12 hours after being posted. That’s basically inexcusable.
But it’s not just the Daily News. Check out the comments in that much-emailed story about Hillary’s assistant:
She’s Hillary’s lover. Duh.
. . .
i knew hill was a rugmuncher all along, now reading how this ho is her ladyfriend all over the internet.
. . .
So what happens again when Huma sits on Hillary’s face, er head that is?
The dates on these comments are (respectively) August 16, October 21 and November 7. That means that for months, these comments — right underneath the text — have been circulating through the internet. The story was coy and didn’t mention anything about rumors or innuendo regarding Hillary’s relationship with her aide. Take the story together with the comments, however, and it becomes awfully inflammatory. And doesn’t the Observer have some obligation to police the comments beyond just allowing users to flag them? And if the Observer doesn’t take them down, doesn’t the combined effect sort of amount to libel?
Seriously — news organizations need to watch this more . . . do you need help or something (I work for cheap!)?