Trump, Leakers, Travel Ban: Our Most Commented-On Articles of 2017

Writing comments is,well,cheap therapy!

The comments (i.e. the voice of the people) are often more interesting and definitely more important than the article itself, so I find myself clicking on an article just to read the comments! I don't always agree with what the NYT chooses to cover (read: not cover), but I am forever grateful for the Comments section (when NYT chooses to open it). I love comparing the Readers' Picks to the NYT's Picks.

The New York Academy of Sciences recently sent out a solicitation for volunteer scientists to teach on social media platforms. Is it time to switch to tweeting?

There are unfortunately many problems inherent in the present system based on what has been disclosed about the approval process. Principally, what the readers “recommend,” what the moderators deem fit, and the feedback loop that places “verified” commenters comments up rapidly, so they are exposed earlier, recommended more, and not vetted by a human until after posting. My point is that you have created an echo chamber. The comments section should be just the opposite, no? Isn’t this where you want opposing views? Critiques of the piece? Look at the most published comments on opinion pieces, they are laudatory, congratulatory, or effusively thankful. I confess here publicly: I do my best to consistently find a contrarian POV to express in the comments. It is challenging and a lot of fun, to think critically about a piece. One unexpected consequence of this approach, some writers, Like Charles Blow, have become absolutely predictable to find an opposing voice for. Frank Bruni, on the other hand, is hardly predictably rejoined. News pieces are more across the board to find a discordant voice to opine with. I also try to match the tenor of the writer; the AI doesn’t want the vitriol of Mr. Blow to be expressed in comments to his articles. Think about THAT. Finally, the editorial pieces that use statistics are now totally suspect to me: By being contrarian, I’ve discovered the statistics are invariably slanted, and the editorial then uses the statistics to justify its position.

I thank you NYT for quoting me. I am deeply honored. But you left out the second half of my comment! I wasn't saying that I was angry at Trump for bashing the NYT and CNN in and of itself. I said that I was angry at Trump for bashing them because his very bashing was ADDING strength to you guys by giving you something people were interested in reading, rather than letting you fade into oblivion. To quote only half of my comment, which loses the entire ironic context, is just more fake news! Here is second half where I explain why I was so disappointed in Trump bashing the media: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/24/us/politics/white-house-sean-spicer-b... "Just when these aging bastions of slanted news and constant spin were about to whither and die, Trump has single handily brought them back from the brink through the "Trump ratings effect." Although they owe him a great debt of gratitude -- as they and their supporters must be expressing on this page-- for us conservatives this is painful to watch. We can forgive, but we shall not forget." Your truncated fake news version of my sarcastic comment about how much I hate the fake news is a perfect example of why I hate the fake news so much.

Social Security is my sole source of income. Therefore, I must be very careful about how I spend my money. I can only subscribe to one newspaper and I have chosen the NY Times. While I can only afford the digital edition, I can say it is the best $15 I spend each month. Thank you NYT for a wealth of information, entertainment and friends.

Mrs. Pritchett, my seventh grade civics teacher, told our class on numerous occasions that you get a far more reliable view of what is really going on by reading more than one newspaper. That is why I’ve always subscribed to several papers at once, currently including the Times, Dallas Morning News, Wall Street Journal and National Enquirer, some delivered daily, others by internet. The best you are ever gonna get from the Times is news that’s fit to print. Me and this good dog here require a lot more news than that.

I used to comment a lot , almost exclusively on Trump , but I’ve slowed down, realizing that there’s not much to say about him that hasn’t been commented on already. So my New Year’s resolution is to comment only when I have something truly profound to write about, not an easy task when dealing with such a predictable psychopath as our president.

On your list of selected contributions, there was nothing by the great poster, Socrates. His comments were filled with the outrage that so many of feel - horror and disgust that we live in the age of Trump. You should revise your selections.

The reality is that the US economy is amazing, we are making advances socially, and the media hates it. As a 2nd gen European-American our lives here are infinitely better than they were in Russia. Try reporting on positive things for a week and not hating on all things republican and conservative; most of us are as fair and reasonable as any democrat and we also dislike Fox News as much as you do. But the NYT can be a lot more balanced as well.

So why do I post comments? Well it’s like this. This dog Kota and I are pretty much housebound now, and I have very few friends that live close by. Long-form reading of books and magazines is getting harder for me, but I can still make my way through most Times articles. I don’t care for crossword puzzles or other mind-stretching games, and use the comment section as a sort of substitute for those. Every day I can still string subject, verb, predicate together in a reasonable way is a victory. Even better are the times when I write something that Kota approves of or laughs at. And then, of course, there is the fact that I was born opinionated and enjoy inflicting my opinions and prejudices on innocent passersby. Thank you for asking. Merry Christmas. Happy Chanukkah, Happy New Year.

Can the priority green check mark system go away? It is so undemocratic.

These are extraordinary times of change we are experiencing. A social and political wake up of the likes that have not been seen in our history for a very long time, the full extent of which have yet to be played out. The old ways are dropping by the wayside, in a sweeping action that is removing all that no longer serves us any useful purpose, if indeed it ever did. The time has passed, whether it be from the confederate flag, or to the Harvey Weinstein’s, and even for the malevolence brought on by our financially manipulated politics, all will now find themselves to be on the run. The scope of this change is remarkable as it is happening everywhere in our world and will not cease to transform our lives, until all such obstacles are removed, to make a way for the new day that is now emerging.

Outrage and frustration with Trump and Congress permeates most of these comments. Despite the chaos many of the Republican goals have been met. The Republican Congress is learning how to move the levers of power to enact their agenda to enrich the rich and emasculate the rest of us. It is time for the rest of us to take our outrage and focus on changing Congress in the 2018 elections.

I vent, you vent, we all vent and it does make us feel a bit better, a bit more parcipitory. Of course if one vents earlier ones comments may be fast-tracked to the "Most Read" heading and not immediately buried in the mass, never to be perused again. No, I do not agree with the two-tiered, green-check system and feel strongly that each opinion should be treated with equal gravitas or its lack there of. But venting is good for this NYT reader and probably helps him feel, in a small way, that the country of his birth remains, at least for today, a participatory democracy. Preaching to the choir.

Of course, how many comments an article gets is partly determined by how long the comments section stays open, and that is determined by the Times staff.

People tend to sound off when they're furious about something. So tell me this: What could possibly be more infuriating than having a dishonest, hostile, self-aggrandizing moron bumbling around the White house and systemically destroying everything good about our country?

Congrats (not!) for creating an automaton -- the Moderator -- that is as liberally biased as your human moderators were. For example, when you start your comment denigrating Trump, it stands a good chance of being published, however off-topic the comment may be. But try getting any sensible pro-Trump comment published is like ... (oh, why bother finishing this post, it's not getting published anyway.)

I write my comments to the NY Times as self-therapy to help me deal with the nightmare of Donald Trump having access to the nuclear codes as he threatens the United States national security. Malcolm Nance had it right. Trump Inc. is a family criminal enterprise that now wields the power to enrich himself and his friends. I thank the NT Times and the “FAKE Media” for their tireless efforts to uncover the truth and point out the lies of this truth challenged White House. Remember “Only I can fix this, and I’ll appoint the best people”. He did and here are some of them: Flynn (indicted), Price (fired for private jets), Anthony Scaramucci (fired for being his foul-mouthed self), Ivanka Trump 9. No you can’t send your return to the IRS on a postcard, and the tax bill refers to filing in April 2019, not 2018. She should have been fired), Sebastian Gorka: Fired for doing a perfect impression of an autocratic villain on Mission Impossible, etc etc. Now I feel better.

To everyone who has lived in the United States for the past 30 years: The America that was a shining star. The America that was always on the side of good vs evil. The America where you could move ahead with hard work and a bit of luck. The America where its people stood shoulder to shoulder. The America that which welcomed the "huddled masses yearning to breathe free" That America died this year. The America that

The NYT needs to do away with the "Green Card" that drops beknighted writers at the front of the line. Don't have a problem with weeding out profanity/vulgarity, totally off-the-wall irrelevant (posts), or ad hominem attacks on fellow Commenters, but the order of display should be that of reception by the Comments app: FIFO. First in, first out. Also, provide a "thumbs down" icon in lieu of the "Flag" function. All too often perfectly appropriate, if controversial, comments are "disappeared" because some reader's fragile sensibilities have been affronted.

Nearly all anti-Trump comments violate the NYT commenting rules. The NYT has gone from objectivity to advocacy. A once great newspaper reduced to a shill for the Democrats. Very sad indeed. I have experimented with this many times. If I flip a posted anti-Trump comment to anti-Hillary or anti-Obama, with the same words but for the names, it never gets posted.

This past year has given us an opportunity to ask ourselves what kind of country do we want to pass down to future generations. I'm grateful that the Times has been so diligent in reporting what's happening and giving us an opportunity to engage in discussions via the expanded comment section. Please keep up the good work in the new year. My only ask is that you stay on top of what's happening behind the scenes when it's so easy to get distracted by whatever nonsense Trump has been spouting as a distraction.

What will be the most commented upon article of 2018? "Dems Take House and Senate. Promise to Impeach Trump and Pence."

How sad that the country’s attention has been diverted to Trump instead of towards the serious problems that need solving such as a great Health Care for all, infrastructure projects throughout the country which would also provide good paying jobs and respect for all who live in these United States It is horrible that Trump is almost the only news we get now.

Many years ago, I wrote an essay as part of a mid-term exam for a tenth grade English class. Truth be told here, I was an average student at best. Looking back, I wish I spent more time studying. The paper was returned with a plethora of margin comments and in-line corrections (all in red ink). Dangling participles Sentence verb agreement Puntuation Split infinitives Teacher comment: If you want people to read your work, IMPROVE YOUR SKILLS. As with other posters on the NYT, the Trump administration has more than tested my patience. I do not post on other forums. I never posted at the NYT until Trump was elected. One of my comments actually zoomed to the most picked: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/14/us/politics/trump-daca-dreamers.html?... Special thanks to the NYT for this forum. Special thanks to the commenters who make the forum interesting and educational. And special thanks to my English teacher. I will never be the next Hemmingway. However, she taught me the importance of being able to write well. I'm still working at it.

Some of my “dinosaur” friends insist on reading the paper version of The Times. They just don’t get it. I have learned so much from the people who contribute to this section and I appreciate their knowledge, insight and emotions. I truly feel part of a greater community.

That some stories generate 10,000 comments should not be cause for celebration. This is a tiny fraction of New York Times readers, and compared to the hundreds of millions of people who should be deeply concerned about these stories, these are pathetically small numbers of comments. Furthermore, a better measure of the healthy and vitality of a comments section would not be the number of comments, but the amount of discussion and interaction between commenters. Under the current comments system, the vast majority of comments get few if any likes, and few if any replies, especially on stories that generate larger numbers of comments. Most comments are buried by the avalanche of other comments, never to be seen again by human eyes. The comments that are usually "liked" the most are generally those that are posted first, regardless of the actual merits of those early comments. Similarly, to some extent, the stories that receive the most comments is determined by how prominently the stories are posted on the New York Times Web site, and for how long. Many interesting and important stories languish in back alleys of the Web site where few people ever see them or comment on them. Replies to comments are not visible except to others who have also replied. Meanwhile, some commenters are allowed to post numerous comments on the same article. There is a lot of room for improvement in the current comments system. I hope that in the new year the Times will resolve to do better.

Of the hundreds of thousands of comments submitted to The Times regarding US politics this year, I wonder how many, if any, were actually read by Trump or influenced his so called “thinking” in any substantive way? And I am afraid I already know the answer to that.

The comments are really a great part of the paper. Admittedly, much of what I say is really just venting and Devil's advocate, but it's a great intellectual community. It feels like thousands of people taking on some of the toughest moral problems together. Merry Xmas all, to all an opinion and to all a good night!

Your deeply appreciated and valued Comments feature should be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. In this cataclysmic Era of Trump, it has probably been been responsible for constructively channeling more anger, outrage, and hostility than any other construct in the world. Thank you much, NYT!

In so many ways the comment sections have motivated me and inspired me to keep on fighting, fighting, fighting against the most horrid president during my seven decades of life. And I would add to that a GOP Congress that seems to aid and abet Mr. Trump in his profound exploitation and attempted manipulation of the electorate, you and me. The comment section helps me to understand another's point of view, in my case a more conservative one. But I respect what I see written even though it often does not deter me from my beliefs. More importantly I can not express enough the hope I feel when I learn of the thousands upon thousands who are outraged by the dishonesty and amorality flowing from the White House and Congress. I realize that we can do it; we together can make a difference and bring democracy back. It's still there within our reach. Finally, I want to thank the New York Times for its superb journalism. I look forward daily in reading its articles - all of them - including its op eds. You have included us readers in your family, and I feel proud about that.

I first started commenting shortly after the election, since then I have submitted many 100's if not a 1000. it's a great way to express oneself during these most difficult times. And more importantly reading the reactions of others. Now and then I get a NYTimes pick, and for some reason it reminds me of elementary school where you get a gold star for a good paper. And that was a while back like the late 1940's. I like that feature, never got too many gold stars way back when! Playing a little catchup now. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all out there in "Times" land. And the rest of the world. Oh, and the universe too. Harry Reed may have been onto something with that UFO funding.

Is there some kind of 12 Step program to break my addiction to reading the NYT comments? Seriously. I find myself entranced. Even though I've discussed the issue with my therapist, I can't seem to break the compulsion. Anyway...Happy New Year.

The editorial challenges for the NY Times in 2018 are notable and real. I have seen the nytimes offer front page coverage to fawning celebrity pieces that strictly belong in People Magazine. It disappoints me to see those articles; And yet they are happening more often than ever on the front pages. That's a big problem. What is driving those articles to appear? It is dreck. On the other hand, I still love the ny times when it tries to explicate as factually as it can everything that is wrong and ridiculous about Trump. I wish the NY Times well, but over all it has often disappointed me in 2017. Hoping for better in 2018. The problems are editorial, not authorial, but they are fixable.

This is the only place I post comments. This is the only place worth posting comments. This is the only place where the comments are worth reading. Thanks New York Times for making this service available and giving the people a platform to be heard. Now if you folks send them on to our elected officials, we could actually get somewhere.

The Times coverage of the Trump administration, and their columnists, have been what keeps me going during these dark times. The outpouring of comments, with some articles getting up to 10,000+ posts, are a testament to our need to share feelings I know I’ve never before experienced at this level of intensity. Our free press must remain free and we all must be willing to defend it. I hate to consider the alternative.

The people speak. Comments is one of the Times most rewarding features and this article proves it.