An update -- and invite -- about shaping Semissourian

Since you are looking for ways to improve, I would throw my vote behind the editing and grammar comment. As a newspaper, your job is to present the news to the public (educate the readers on events and "news"). I cringe when there are grammar mistakes in the articles and columns, for this too, educates the public. (negatively)

I agree with Rick, a better balance of liberal and conservative perspectives is warranted. We are a literate and knowledgeable society who can form our own opinions when we have the facts.

Take a look at revising Comments rules. Too many don't even address issues raised in the original article and too many are just snarky barbs and attacks on others who made comments. Also, one cogent comment per person per article should be enough. Your computerized screener could handle that easily.

Agree with the above comments. IMO, just have an equal amount of True Liberal and True Conservative Opinion Columns - you know that fair and balance thing!

If a comment has an Are You Sure Your Comment is Civil, highlight the word(s) that are uncivil so the comment by the poster can revise it easier. Do away with the Respect/No Respect kids feature.

Also, no sock puppets - one username only per person.

I agree with a balanced view, but we are a conservative community and I appreciate being able to find some information that is not based on the liberal agenda, you know, pro Critical race theory, personal pronouns, 125 genders, full term abortion, open borders, coddling the Chinese, prioritizing the woke agenda in the military, idolizing career criminals (George Floyd) destruction of our historic memorials, labeling of our own conservative citizens as (domestic terrorist), and calling conservatives ( Cultist) based on our values. Having life saving medicine rationed by the Biden cartel. Last but not least the erosion of our civil liberties with the obscene abuse of executive orders from the woke house in DC. We need more moderate and conservative views. The liberal agenda is being shoved down our throats across all main stream sources.

If someone really believes in what they comment about, they should be required to use their real name and not some "shoot from behind the curtain" fake name. I notice your LTE's require a person's name and opinion columns require a person's name so why not on the on-lone comments?

In our climate today I don’t need some cancel culture liberal being able to threaten me or my family or track down my address. Which has happened to me in the past. My opinion is as valid as yours. Stop trying to censor me!

Posted by Love2read on Sat, Sep 18, 2021, at 12:30 PM

Well said!

COWARDS

Posted by Michael Masterson on Sat, Sep 18, 2021, at 1:32 PM

Thanks for saving computer storage space!

I can relate to Love2Read's sentiments regarding use of a nom de plume vs. a real name. I've been personally attacked, had personal information about me posted in these comments and have received personal threats by people who did not like my comments. "Cancel culture" can cut both ways and its reach can extend beyond this site.

I actually canceled my subscription to the paper at the end of last year out of disgust over the OpEd page, but my wife wanted to have an online subscription, to I still look at the site once in a while.

I have noticed that the Missourian has made some improvements. Adrienne Ross' column no longer appears in the paper and David Limbaugh has departed as well. I don't have a problem with conservative columnists who can write and develop a cogent argument but neither Ross nor Limbaugh seemed inclined to do that with any regularity. For someone who supposedly teaches writing (Ross) and a member of the legal profession (Limbaugh), both displayed a disheartening lack of polish and precision in their columns, a disregard for the facts and a willingness to present demonstrable falsehoods. Most of their columns looked like something thrown together the night before deadline.

Lowry and Goldberg are the best of the conservatives that appear on the op-ed pages. Michael Reagan and Victor Davis Hanson, on the other hand, live in some sort of right-wing la-la land and offer little but fantasy. The rest of them, I can take or leave.

Gene Lyons, a frequent critic of the former guy, appears only in the print edition, so online-only readers have to hunt him down on other sites.

In the past, I've complained about the uncritical coverage of our elected representatives. Most items about Rep. Smith, Sen. Hawley, Gov. Parson, state Sen. Rehder or state Rep. Wallingford are little more than press releases with no context or comment from other sources. This is lazy reporting that doesn't even rise to the level of journalism. There is also little or no enterprise/investigative reporting done. I see more of it from the local TV news than I ever have in the Missourian. The recent publication of a full-page story from the Epoch Times might have been an attempt at filling that gap, but it fell flat. Someone at the Missourian needs to vet its sourcing so that mistakes such as that are not repeated.

The scanty political reportage and lack of any journalistic digging could be attributed to staffing issues or a fear of rocking the local boat. Once a publisher is more concerned about how he's viewed at the local Chamber of Commerce or country club, he's lost the battle to make his newspaper relevant.

To his credit, Mr. Rust made it a personal mission to present information about COVID-19 last year. The hysterically negative response he received from some people only pointed up the challenges one has in this market when trying to present facts.

As for the copy editing, American newspapers have taken that out behind the barn and put a bullet in its head. Then the Missourian took the corpse and put it through a wood chipper. It is apparent that some stories are not even read once, but instead simply flowed into the page and published. It is not unusual to see in the body of, say, a Wall Street Journal story published in the Missourian a parenthetical comment such as "see attached chart" or "insert link here."

As someone who worked the horseshoe for a number of years, I feel for the copy editors, who are probably being asked to do more than ever, but if the Missourian brain trust wants to make an investment in improving the paper's credibility, this would be a good place to start.

It's obvious who the liberal commenters are and who the conservative commenters are. That novel of a diatribe running down this paper was a sour grapes democrat without a doubt.

Great paper, does a huge service to the community and in a tough competitive industry. They focus on the most important thing... the customer and they work to add value to their lives. If they didn't they wouldn't exist like many newspapers who have gone bankrupt or folded up in past years.

The democrats posting line up perfectly. They demand real names only of non-democrats, they demand articles that don't reflect news but do reflect their opinion and they don't like conversing. They want one-hit lines of talking points and hate to be challenged or questioned on their thoughts. Oh yes - they also demand more deleting and censoring of people who disagree with them.

Keep up the good work Mr. Rust. I hope your business model is making enough money to keep it going. Unlike Biden followers who think the world runs on "free stuff" the rest of us know the tremendous amount of work it requires to keep this gem going day after day.

Thank you!

I agree that a better balance of liberal and conservative perspectives is warranted. And please, no more questionable sources.

I can understand people wanting to use a pseudonym for security purposes but I also feel that using our real names becomes a moderation tool in and of itself.

Someone suggested keeping the comments down to one per story. In a way, that makes sense. That allows us to comment on the article without getting into a back and forth between commenters.

I agree that there seems to be a real lack of investigative reporting and also a lack of follow-up on some stories. I also agree that the copy editing could be better.

I DO like having a local newspaper, esp the online version.

I am glad you are going to try to keep the print edition going and perhaps even expand the number of days. I know it is costly to do this, but there are a large number of readers who prefer a print edition. I also think the quality of the local news coverage has been improved lately with the addition of an additional experienced reporter.

I would appreciate ANY news source presenting more factual information without editorializing or opinions....just the facts ma'm...possibly presenting more national and world news via AP wire.

Kristen Hopper and Michael Masterson: I bet you would love for everyone to reveal their true name. That would silence a lot of people from posting comments. At one point in the past I had used my name and was doxed and threatened and harassed by people that were taking names and making lists. I did not agree with the main stream narrative, so I needed to be personally attacked. And why would we only need to make one comment? Dialog is the foundation of a free democracy! We should all want to hear from everyone, whether you agree or not! In a civil society dialog should be encouraged.

Kristen if you believe in only one comment per person I encourage you to set the example.

The Missourian provides me with 90% of my local news. Jonah Goldberg is about the only opinion writer who makes an effort to present both sides of an issue; all the rest are totally biased one way or the other.

The online comments are filled with misinformation and animus and only add to the divisions in our community.

Thank you all for your comments and perspectives. We are taking everything into consideration.