Margaret Sullivan, columnist for The Washington Post:

When NPR announced last month that it would no longer feature comments from readers on its website, general rejoicing followed.

“Good riddance — and everybody else should do the same” was the tone of the response I saw on Twitter. USA Today columnist Rem Rieder, noting that other news organizations are moving away from comments as well, wrote, “Their disappearance is welcome.” And even NPR’s ombudswoman, Elizabeth Jensen, wrote that the move made sense to her, since such a small slice of the audience was participating.

I disagree. I find value in reader comments that can’t be adequately reproduced elsewhere. The argument that the conversation has migrated to Facebook and Twitter is flawed. Those are good places for discussion, but they are no substitute for having discussion take place where the story itself lives. I’m convinced that many smart readers with something to contribute will not follow a story onto social media to talk about it. News organizations should fix online comments rather than ditch them.

I agree. There is no substitute for having the conversation where the story lives. There’s a sense of community that develops when old hands with long memories and weigh in, point out errors, spar with each other in a healthy way, and move the conversation along.

The hard part is keeping out the trolls and spam. That takes vigilance.

I totally understand why NPR and others have gotten rid of comments. At a certain level of popularity, keeping out the trolls and spam becomes unmanageable. And that’s a shame. I love the Loop community. They call me on my mistakes, which helps all of us, and they have my back when the trolls come.