I've been listening to sports talk radio since "Sportsphone 68" with Scottie Sterling was on the Bay Area airwaves during the 1970s. I think the show was on for a couple hours on weekday evenings.
These days, there are full-time sports radio stations, and some of them fill nearly all 24 hours with talk shows. These shows mostly amount to guys (and the rare brave gal) bloviating about which teams and players suck or rule. Although they have memorized the previous night's scores and stats, few participants – hosts included – have any real insight into why Team A beat Team B, or why Player X was unable to rush for a critical first down.
Mostly, the folks on sports talk radio want to express their strong opinions. When the subject is big-time spectator sports, it doesn't matter that the opinions are based on very few actual facts because none of it really matters. It's only sports.
Over the years, discussion about things that do matter — such as social policies that effect millions of people's everyday lives – has devolved to the level of sports talk radio. "Dialogue" amounts to a bunch of hot-headed people with strong opinions yelling over one another. You get name-calling, shouting, insults, threats – essentially all the things that your mother and second grade teacher warned you about. And this doesn't occur solely on AM talk radio and cable television. You can see vivid examples in the comments that many newspapers permit readers to post at the end of on-line stories.
If you scroll down very far in these comments, you'll find dialogue that goes something like this:
"You're an idiot."
"No I'm not, you are."
"Takes one to know one."
"You must know them all."
What once seemed like a populist idea – letting readers comment immediately about the news of the day – has become just another annoyance. However, at least a few newspapers are reconsidering their policy of letting readers self-post anonymous comments. The Sacramento Bee ombudsman recently questioned that paper's policy after commenters attacked a rape victim who testified before a legislative committee.
This is my way of getting around to talking about CP&DR's policy regarding comments on news stories and blog entries. We permit readers to post comments. You simply need to be registered and logged in to read or post comments. Although we don't receive a lot of comments, we strongly encourage them because the level of dialogue here is different. Our audience is sophisticated and the comments reflect this. Since we started allowing comments a little more than a year ago, we have removed exactly one submittal. It was a diatribe that was only tangentially related to the subject at hand. I'm sure no newspaper would have removed the comment, but our standards are higher.
Am I being elitist? Probably. But I do know that I'm not the only person who values facts, well-researched analysis, reasoned argument and opinions that just might be different from my own.
So, if you want to comment on any story you see on this website — including this very blog entry — sign up, log in, and have at it. We're happy to foster a discussion about land use policy, real estate development and related subjects. I have no doubt that our readers still remember what their second grade teachers taught them about civility.
- Paul Shigley
