[datavirtue]

I assign very little value to anything on the web that can't be commented on. Sure, a solid piece of journalism does have value but more so if people can add to the conversation.

Users should be able to moderate though and moderation points should be earned and spent and provide some context. Users should be able to browse comments based on their preferences, revealing those posts which have been down-voted out of sight, or made anonymously, if they choose.

[Doctor_Fegg]

Everything on the web can be commented on. Post the URL to Reddit, Twitter, wherever. Add your comments underneath. There you go, conversation started.

That doesn't mean that the publisher has to host your opinions on their site. It's their site, they choose what to put on it. They're under no obligation to amplify your opinions.

[datavirtue]

I didn't say they were under any obligation. Your strawman is all wet.

[bobthepanda]

So, every piece of journalism can have value if it can be commented on some place on the internet, which is pretty much anything with a URL.

[Emma_Goldman]

Your first and second sentence contradict one another. You assign 'very little value to anything that can't be commented on', yet you believe a 'solid piece of journalism does have value', even if it can't be commented on.

I would say the overwhelming majority of quality writing on the internet does not accommodate comments, from academic journals, to serious think-pieces and long-form essays.

[DharmaPolice]

"Letters to the Editor" used to (and I suppose still does) function as a method of replying to serious think pieces. Of course the newspaper/magazine curated (and edited) which replies were printed and just as importantly there's a built in speed limit to that kind of exchange. Both these things help (although you do still see incredibly stupid things in letters to the editor).

[_wp3r]

I would disagree, in that a presumptively factual news article should not also include reader opinion as context. That seems counter productive to news distribution. I would suggest that we have a opinion crisis in journalism already, and comments only contribute to the problem.

User point systems are very lopsided to users that have the time to generate points, which is probably a negative selector for quality/experience/diversity in opinion.