Newspaper Wants You To Pay To Comment

from the well,-that-seems-safe dept

It's no secret that many online publications struggle with how best to handle their comment sections. Should they allow anonymous comments? Should there be some kind of moderation? Well, it appears that the Sun Chronicle, which appears to be based in Massachusetts, has chosen to go to a pretty extreme position. Reader Shawn alerts us that The Sun Chronicle disabled their comment system a few months back, after it got upset about a few anonymous readers "disrupting" things. Shawn says "When the comments went away I found myself spending less time on the site but didnt care enough to complain." However, he recently went back and was surprised that, in order to comment you need to hand over your credit card, and the paper will charge you $0.99. Obviously, this is more to prove that you are who you say you are, but it does seem a bit distorted when the newspaper wants to charge people just to comment. Also, once charged, your name and hometown are automatically associated with your comments. I can't see how that's all that appealing to most people. The newspaper says this is "a necessary step," but I'm not sure how many people in the community will agree. Instead, they might just go elsewhere.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  1.  
    identicon
    quickbrownfox, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 7:08am

    99 cents

    Readers of the Sun Chronicle will now have to choose between an iTunes download and a story comment. Tough choice!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2.  
    icon
    average_joe (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 7:16am

    I get where they're coming from. Some comment sections are just terrible. Charging $0.99 might weed out some of the idiots.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3.  
    icon
    lavi d (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 7:19am

    Prior Art

    Metafilter has charged a $5 membership fee forever. It certainly seems to go a long ways towards weeding out the morons.

    The commentary their is routinely humorous and insightful and free from spam and (most) stupidity.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4.  
    icon
    lavi d (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 7:20am

    Re: Prior Art

    Metafilter has charged a one time $5 membership fee forever. It certainly seems to go a long ways towards weeding out the morons.

    The commentary there is routinely humorous and insightful and free from spam and (most) stupidity.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 7:20am

    Imagine how many newspapers are lost in history due to 95 year copyright length. Unacceptable. IP maximists are so short sighted that they long term historical archives for short term profits. Can’t have past content compete with present content you know.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 7:21am

    Re:

    that they trade *

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 7:28am

    So why isn't there more spam here? I know we get the usual troll but I don't think I have seen spam on any of the comments, unlike some of the other tech places which seem to have spam as the first or second comment, and there you have to register.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8.  
    identicon
    Rick Sarvas, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 7:31am

    -

    It appears that the 99 cents is the one-time fee charged to create an account that in turn allows you to comment on the Chronicle related web sites, and not 99 cents per comment. Not so bad, provided you don't want to post a rant that can be linked back to your name and address.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 7:37am

    No Comment.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 7:39am

    Re: -

    Yeah, I think Mike already noted this.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11.  
    identicon
    Anonymously Brave, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 7:51am

    Discourse is always poorer when barriers are erected...physical, psychological, or otherwise.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12.  
    icon
    imbrucy (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 7:52am

    Re:

    Charging anything is more likely to weed out everyone then just the idiots.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13.  
    identicon
    Pixelation, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 7:55am

    Will the paper now be responsible for any comments made since they are making money from them? I imagine someone could find a way to have a faked registration.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14.  
    identicon
    Tamara, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 7:58am

    Re:

    They won't be making money from them. The one-time 99c for lifetime membership covers administrative fees.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 7:58am

    Re:

    because each commment is reviewed before it is allowed to be posted, so the spam is denied. The only real solution to spam is human review, but it takes some time and money to do.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 7:58am

    Re:

    because each commment is reviewed before it is allowed to be posted, so the spam is denied. The only real solution to spam is human review, but it takes some time and money to do.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17.  
    identicon
    John Doe, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 8:14am

    Re: Re:

    Comments show up immediately so I don't believe they are reviewed by a human. There are several spam blocker packages for blogs so I suspect Mike is using one or more of those.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18.  
    identicon
    John Doe, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 8:17am

    I wouldn't pay

    There are places where I comment under my real name (John Doe) and there are places where I comment under a fake name. Many times I comment under a fake name because the internet, like the elephant, never forgets. Who knows, one day I may run for office and someone will google me and find some comment I made on a religious, political or other hot button topic and sink my campaign. I don't want to even think about "the photos". ;)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19.  
    icon
    Dark Helmet (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 8:17am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Which is pretty cool actually. The heuristics are good enough that we're able to share links w/each other, sometimes even to personal items/sites. Lord knows I've referred people to the Doc Stoc link where I have one of my novels several times, and I always worried it would come off as spammish.

    On the other hand, it seems likely that the spam blockers may be focused more on offending IP addresses and/or domains as opposed to heuristic methods...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20.  
    icon
    redwall_hp (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 8:25am

    Is it a one-time fee or per comment? It sucks if it's the latter, but there are other forums that have went for the one-time fee thing. If you want to post on the IMDB forums you have to verify your account either by making a small credit card transaction or by linking it to an Amazon account with at least one purchase. I think they also let you verify by SMS now, which is less of a deterrent for bozos.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 8:26am

    Hmm, its a one time fee, which makes it less obtrusive. Still, I dont like the idea, but the implementation seems to be good.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 8:26am

    User Posts: "LOL"
    Newspaper Posts: We value your opinion, that will be $10.00 please, thank you for reading our paper.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23.  
    icon
    Overcast (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 8:39am

    It's one of maybe 250,000 sites - that offer the same information. News.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 8:39am

    http://techdirt.com/articles/20100706/23322610092.shtml

    considering the important points you missed in that story, would you perhaps like to add some stuff to this story?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25.  
    identicon
    Chad, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 8:40am

    What a cop out. Putting them back with a fee they might as well have left them disabled. This is done so that the comments are still technically disabled (nobody would want to pay for that), while giving them the appearance of being enabled so that people stop complaining.

    Enable your comments, remove the fee, and hire some 15 year old summer student to watch them for spam.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  26.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 8:47am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "On the other hand, it seems likely that the spam blockers may be focused more on offending IP addresses and/or domains as opposed to heuristic methods..."

    Probably, but unfortunately the U.S. government is now seeking to turn the Internet into the same advertisement filled nonsense that everything outside the Internet has become.

    http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100616/0137529843.shtml

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  27.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 8:49am

    Re: Re:

    No, that's not true. IIRC Mike has some Bayesian filter that only catches comments that resemble spam. Those comments are held for moderation, only appearing after they're approved. All other comments are immediate.

    I've never had one of my comments delayed by it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  28.  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 8:59am

    Re:

    "I get where they're coming from. Some comment sections are just terrible. Charging $0.99 might weed out some of the idiots."

    Actually its going to bias the story toward the person willing to spend the most money. Think Lobbyist, and anyone else wanting to drown out discenting voices.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  29.  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 9:02am

    Re: Re: Re:

    "I've never had one of my comments delayed by it."

    I have had one held back. That was my post on all the URLs for all of rupert murdochs newspaper websites. It took an hour to show up.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  30.  
    identicon
    Infowars, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 9:02am

    Hahaha.

    Notice how there is not ONE comment in any of the articles I glanced at! hahaha.. Love it..

    Never mind all the TYRANNY, LoHAN is going to jail for 90 days! I feel safer already!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  31.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 9:06am

    Re: Re: Prior Art

    Too bad the site design is horrible. I won't visit or comment on a site with horrid layout/coloring.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  32.  
    identicon
    David T, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 9:09am

    Well..

    I like the idea of having the OPTION to using a real identity, in that there is a formal structure to do so. But it must also be coupled with the ability to mute any comments made by people NOT using their true identity.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  33.  
    identicon
    ds, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 9:38am

    Re:

    How do we weed out you?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  34.  
    identicon
    ted hidell, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 9:55am

    Newpapers don't get it

    The more comments the more readers. If they do start charge will get less viewers and less comments. They also need to stop making apinions and report news as is with out yellow journalism. Would get more reader than you could shake a paper at. The reason most papers are losing is they feel they have to find the nex watergate etc. Reporter aren't reporting they are commenting on the news this is not real journalism. There are a lot of yellow out there the one who will win it the newpaper that just reports. I hope if they stay the way they are (NewPaper)they do loss. The winner will be the true journalist.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  35.  
    identicon
    Dude, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 10:50am

    Hah

    You routinely refuse to run my comments that say pro-copyright things. How are you any different?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  36.  
    icon
    average_joe (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 11:04am

    Re: Re:

    "Actually its going to bias the story toward the person willing to spend the most money. Think Lobbyist, and anyone else wanting to drown out discenting voices."

    Huh? It's only $0.99 to be able to comment, no matter how many comments you make.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  37.  
    icon
    average_joe (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 11:07am

    Re: Re:

    "How do we weed out you?"

    Wow! What a reply! Got anything substantive to say?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  38.  
    icon
    average_joe (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 11:11am

    Re:

    "Discourse is always poorer when barriers are erected...physical, psychological, or otherwise."

    All barriers are bad always? Meh.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  39.  
    icon
    average_joe (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 11:14am

    Re: Newpapers don't get it

    "The more comments the more readers."

    Care to cite a source for this? And since when does more equal better?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  40.  
    icon
    Eugene (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 11:42am

    From the Sun's site: "The credit card will be charged a one-time fee of 99 cents to activate the account."

    Cheaper than Something Awful's forum. And honestly, I think SA had the right idea. It works. It would be nearly impossible to maintain a community that vast and that hyperactive for so long unless there was some kind of standard of quality. And what better standard than having members literally put their money where their mouth is?

    Of course, the catch is that you need to be on the same philosophical page as your members, and you need to be able to communicate your intentions in a way that they'll accept this hoop in the interests of quality management. Will that happen here? I don't know. It's an easy thing to screw up.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  41.  
    icon
    Mike Masnick (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 12:16pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    No, that's not true. IIRC Mike has some Bayesian filter that only catches comments that resemble spam. Those comments are held for moderation, only appearing after they're approved. All other comments are immediate

    This is correct. We have a filter that catches most of the spam (we get on the order of 10,000 spam comments per day). It also tends to catch a small number of legit comments in the process (and miss a small number of spam comments that get through). We review what's caught in the filter pretty regularly and release it when we spot it. And if we see spam that gets through we delete it.

    For the most part the automated system works with a little bit of oversight.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  42.  
    icon
    Mike Masnick (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 12:19pm

    Re: Hah

    You routinely refuse to run my comments that say pro-copyright things. How are you any different?


    Hmm. First of all, this is not true. We've never not allowed a comment that disagrees with us. We have blocked out spam and totally off-topic comments. But even if the spam filter catches a comment that totally disagrees with our position, we let it through. That should be obvious from all of the comments that disagree with us on this site.

    Second, even if that were true (again, it's not), it would be quite different. Moderating comments is totally different from charging people to comment.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  43.  
    identicon
    Saragon, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 12:25pm

    Worth a shot

    While I don't really think it's going to be successful, I'm actually a little bit encouraged to see that a newspaper tried to monetize their website in a different way. Everyone can pass all those stories around without paywalls getting in the way, but for "premium" benefits you have to pay. In theory it's very close to a lot of the ideas TechDirt's batted around before. I'm not sure it's workable -- I just don't know if the demand for commenting on ever-changing news articles can be monetized -- but it's a lot better than other plans.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  44.  
    icon
    average_joe (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 1:06pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "This is correct. We have a filter that catches most of the spam (we get on the order of 10,000 spam comments per day). It also tends to catch a small number of legit comments in the process (and miss a small number of spam comments that get through). We review what's caught in the filter pretty regularly and release it when we spot it. And if we see spam that gets through we delete it.

    For the most part the automated system works with a little bit of oversight."

    10,000 spams a day?!?! Wow!

    You don't sleep much, do you, Mike? :)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  45.  
    icon
    average_joe (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 1:19pm

    Re: Worth a shot

    "While I don't really think it's going to be successful, I'm actually a little bit encouraged to see that a newspaper tried to monetize their website in a different way. Everyone can pass all those stories around without paywalls getting in the way, but for "premium" benefits you have to pay. In theory it's very close to a lot of the ideas TechDirt's batted around before. I'm not sure it's workable -- I just don't know if the demand for commenting on ever-changing news articles can be monetized -- but it's a lot better than other plans."

    I just tried to help Mike monetize this site by signing up for a membership, but the t-shirts in my size were all sold out.

    Can't us XXL's get some love too?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  46.  
    icon
    DanVan (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 1:24pm

    I hope they make changes as well though I do not know how to solve the problem

    But, the main paper that I go to allows all comments without moderation and the site has turned into just terrible comments....all around....racist comments and insults everywhere....it is killing the site

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  47.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 1:33pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I doubt Mike personally reads the each spammy comment. More likely, he uses a wordpress plugin called Akismet which runs about $50 a month.

    But the PR of saying 10k comments a day are sorted through is priceless.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  48.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 1:33pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I doubt Mike personally reads the each spammy comment. More likely, he uses a wordpress plugin called Akismet which runs about $50 a month.

    But the PR of saying 10k comments a day are sorted through is priceless.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  49.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 1:33pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I doubt Mike personally reads each spammy comment. More likely, he uses a wordpress plugin called Akismet which runs about $50 a month.

    But the PR of saying 10k comments a day are sorted through is priceless.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  50.  
    identicon
    AW, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 1:51pm

    Re: Hah

    Dude,
    You realize how many pro-copyright people we have comment? There's the AntiMike and Darryl right off the top of my head. They are kind of like the part of the family we love but completely disagree with. As a community you're always invited to the table for the dicussion, yes we may get rowdy sometimes, but I don't think anyone has EVER been intentionally blocked because they disagree.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  51.  
    identicon
    AW, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 1:52pm

    Re: Re: Worth a shot

    heh...love the Average Joes reference coupled with the XXL. Something about that just makes me smile

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  52.  
    icon
    Mike Masnick (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 3:19pm

    Re: Re: Worth a shot

    I just tried to help Mike monetize this site by signing up for a membership, but the t-shirts in my size were all sold out.

    Can't us XXL's get some love too?


    We'll be refreshing options soon... hang in there.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  53.  
    icon
    Mike Masnick (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 3:22pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    I doubt Mike personally reads the each spammy comment. More likely, he uses a wordpress plugin called Akismet which runs about $50 a month.

    We used Akismet in the past, but we stopped using it maybe two years ago when it slowed down processing of the site. We use our own filter tool.

    But the PR of saying 10k comments a day are sorted through is priceless.

    The system we uses filters comments into multiple buckets based on what triggered the filter. Based on that there are certain actions (not going to reveal what) that are *without a doubt spam*. Those are not reviewed, and those represent probably 95 to 99% of the spam on a given day. So, no, a human does not review all 10k spam posts.

    So, a human generally has to review maybe 500 posts per day (usually less), and that can be done pretty quickly, honestly, since the obvious spam ones can be spotted quickly.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  54.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Weasel, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 5:07pm

    Re: Re: Worth a shot

    "Can't us XXL's get some love too?"


    There are special websites for XXL love.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  55.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 9th, 2010 @ 5:20pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Hmmm...my comments rarely get a green light, some are posted after a few hours and some never come to light, those that mean I'm a spammer?

    The funny part is that most of my posts that get caught on the filter have no links in it.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  56.  
    icon
    Mike Masnick (profile), Jul 9th, 2010 @ 7:08pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Hmmm...my comments rarely get a green light, some are posted after a few hours and some never come to light, those that mean I'm a spammer?


    If the comment is on topic, it is posted. And, no, it does not mean you are a spammer. It either means that you have done things that look like a spammer or that you are using an IP address regularly used by spammers. If you use a proxy service, that could be the issue. If this is a problem for you, don't use a proxy service. Otherwise you have to wait for comments to be approved. That is the tradeoff.

    The funny part is that most of my posts that get caught on the filter have no links in it.


    Not all spam is link based.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  57.  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Jul 10th, 2010 @ 2:41am

    dee dee dee

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  58.  
    identicon
    Josh, Jul 12th, 2010 @ 5:08pm

    My letter to the publisher

    I sent the following to the publisher of the Sun Chronicle.

    J

    ------------------

    All,

    I'm writing in response to changes to your online commenting policy, which I became aware of via http://techdirt.com/articles/20100705/15004510071.shtml.

    While they are your publications to do with as you wish, I cannot help but strongly disagree with your actions. I appreciate the difficulties preventing a few bad apples from ruining things for others, these measures seem like overkill.

    My objections are two-fold: requiring payment and real names. While $0.99 may seem trivial ("it's an iTunes track!"), there's a longstanding argument that there are two prices on the Internet: free and expensive (http://redeye.firstround.com/2007/03/the_first_penny.html). Even if the fee was only $0.01 and connected to some magic 1-click eCommerce solution, there's a mental cost associated with the transaction that will turn some potentially high quality commenters away. This isn't idle speculation - as those of us who spend our time trying to build communities will tell you, we often fight to lower barriers of entry (e.g., "Do we absolutely need to know the visitor's age/gender/location to do this function? No? Then don't ask it").

    Likewise, enforced usage of real names carries with it a severe mental cost. While fees can be amortized to near nothing, reputation is forever. I'm unsure if I'd want my idle commentary forever linked to me by anyone who can search the web.

    The core of this issue, and the reason why I wrote, is community and the evolving role that the fourth estate can play in it. Fundamental to that is the idea that while your corporation may own the stories and the publishing platform, no one entity can own the conversation surrounding them. At best, you can hope to cultivate a place where reasoned debates and insights take place. At worst, you can smother it by trying to control it.

    Regardless, best of luck with this latest change - I'll be watching to see how it plays out.

    Sincerely,
    Josh

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  59.  
    identicon
    guitar lessons, Aug 4th, 2010 @ 3:27pm

    NO Way Jöse!

    I cannot believe that those FAT CATS at the big press are now wanting to get me to pay my hard earned money to tell them how much they aren't so good. I have to admit that as someone who learned a lot online, music espcially that this isn't right. Education should be free. I learned guitar music theory online and I didn't pay a dime!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  60.  
    identicon
    pacquiao vs margarito, Aug 5th, 2010 @ 5:30pm

    It is possible to pay the readers to comment

    Why? it is because a time consuming reading all those problems in earthing news. So that all of readers can be more helpful to the newspaper company.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  61.  
    identicon
    melinda, Aug 25th, 2010 @ 9:32am

    sohbet

    Thanks you admin

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  62.  
    icon
    sedatre (profile), Aug 25th, 2010 @ 9:44am

    sohbet

    Thanks you admin

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  63.  
    identicon
    Chat, Apr 29th, 2011 @ 7:10am

    chat sohbet

    You realize how many pro-copyright people we have comment? There's the AntiMike and Darryl right off the top of my head.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  64.  
    identicon
    Guest, Feb 20th, 2014 @ 7:59am

    Nintendo too!

    Now Nintendo is doing this too!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This