‘Barb liked this.’ Period.
February 20, 2019 9:21 AM   Subscribe

While I generally go out of my way to avoid comments (including and especially on my own work) like the plague, one form of crowdsourced feedback has become an attraction rather than a repellent—as much of an attraction, even, as the original content it’s attached to. The posts attached to the recipes on The New York Times’ stand-alone Cooking site are everything the archetypal internet comment is not (The Ringer).
posted by devrim (24 comments total)

This post was deleted for the following reason: Poster's Request -- frimble



 
At Cooking, however, every single note is approved or rejected by an actual human being.
posted by tofu_crouton at 9:24 AM on February 20, 2019 [14 favorites]


Ironically, I think The Ringer very quickly ditched comments?
posted by ominous_paws at 9:30 AM on February 20, 2019


Just an observation:

I'm all for human moderation and more civil comment sections.

But, although effective moderation will prevent RavensFan74 from sharing his opinions about the international Jewry under a chicken marsala recipe, it does nothing to change the fact that he has those opinions. I just won't know about it.

(Just as, before Facebook came along, I could never have stumbled across my landlady's profile, and learned that she's a Ben Shapiro fan. Sigh.)

Like I said: just an observation. I don't know what my point is.

(Also, I keep seeing the term "tragedy of the commons" used to mean "anything bad which occurs among a group of people". That is...not what it means.)
posted by escape from the potato planet at 9:42 AM on February 20, 2019 [8 favorites]


Soft-Boiled Eggs With Anchovy Toast

No thanks, I'll stick to the usual!
posted by thelonius at 9:52 AM on February 20, 2019


I'm curious how much of this is due to the fact that recipe sites are ubiquitous and free. There are no shortage of recipes on the internet. So to differentiate themselves as somehow worthwhile as a subscription service they have to provide and guarantee something that the rest of the internet doesn't.

Narrowly focused curation and some moderated comments. A safe space. Trust. A friendly community of shared interests.
posted by srboisvert at 10:04 AM on February 20, 2019


my take (worked at nytimes.com and Huffington Post for a long time)

Human moderated sites are better for the obvious reasons:
* no insane or off-topic posts make it to the threads, so you can actually read them

And, for some less-than-obvious reasons:
* People are actually looking for good community experiences on the internet -- if you make one, they will come and stay and contribute.
* If you filter the spam and the hate and the inanity, you de-incentivize those behaviors
* If you make something special on the internet because you have a unique and vibrant community you incentivize positive behaviors
* Over time these forces create something that you can't just make -- you have to cultivate

Last observation:
* Used to be that "great community" meant good comments on the page, which == amazing Page Rank and SEO results, which was the thing that you touted to sell premium ads, which is how you stayed in business. It would seem that these things matter much less these days. SEO is a modest (5-20%) fraction of traffic these days and it is hard to use it to up your rates.
* So, corporate, revenue-driven businesses care less about community these days, by and large -- with notable exceptions like NYT that have found that it is effective in their digital subscription strategy.
posted by n9 at 10:09 AM on February 20, 2019 [3 favorites]


I think the comments on a lot of cooking sites and blogs often are pretty good. Serious Eats, Homesick Texan, Maangchi, I often learn something from the reader comments. There's something about home cooking that brings out goodness in people.

The NYT's moderators must be the key though. Even the comments on the recent controversial recipes like American cheese and ramen or Green pea guacomole are reasonable.
posted by Nelson at 10:10 AM on February 20, 2019 [1 favorite]


NYT's recipe site is also differentiated by the quality and depth of it's content. The recent "No Recipe Recipe Book" supplement in the paper (and on the site: here) Is stunning in quality and production value. I used to chat with Mark Bitman when he worked at NYT and really admired his take on what it meant to be a food+cooking writer. He was shooting *high* I think, and they continue to do so.
posted by n9 at 10:11 AM on February 20, 2019 [3 favorites]


I blame my fellow webshits. We were trusted with a beautiful new medium with infinite possibilities for human growth and connectedness and instead we designed it into a hateful and anxious place feeding off mankind's worst fears and insecurities. Designed it and then blamed people for using it as intended.
posted by Foci for Analysis at 10:12 AM on February 20, 2019 [2 favorites]


I use NYTCooking constantly and I've never looked at the notes; I guess I'll have to go back and remedy that. One of the interesting things to me is that if you use the Cooking app, the notes are actually kind of a pain to get to. Rather than show up at the bottom of the recipe like on the website, you have to press a little icon in the top right corner; however, that only gives you something like the first 50 characters of the top three "most helpful" notes. To see all the notes in their entirety, you have to push another button.

My cooking style nowadays is mostly scrolling through the site for general flavor combination ideas rather than strict recipes, so the notes might actually be an interesting thing to look at to see how other people have tinkered with them.
posted by backseatpilot at 10:19 AM on February 20, 2019 [1 favorite]


But, although effective moderation will prevent RavensFan74 from sharing his opinions about the international Jewry under a chicken marsala recipe, it does nothing to change the fact that he has those opinions. I just won't know about it.

It prevents the next user, say, xBongzilla69x from seeing the opinion and possibly learning more*, and from forming the impression that this opinion is common or acceptable.

* note that right wing hate groups are really good at coining new terms that are unique so that when searched they lead directly into their ecosystems. Instead of just saying that they hate women, they will use, for example, a specific twisted Matrix metaphor where the first search hits go directly into the manosphere. (Google's number one suggested answer thing when I typed it in a private browser window included the term "SJW".) The first thing a lot of people do when they encounter a word/phrase that they do not know is search for it; YouTube is particularly good at radicalizing people who once clicked on an explainer video and now get straight Infowars.
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 11:04 AM on February 20, 2019 [17 favorites]


It prevents the next user, say, xBongzilla69x from seeing the opinion and possibly learning more*

I've always thought that instead of banning or deleteing bad comments from comment-driven sites, their text should be changed to something like 'xBongzilla69x said something racist and stupid.', which theoretically poisons xBongzilla69x's well of supporters and forces valuable comments. Of course, to determine that something is worthy of ban/change, human moderation is needed.
posted by The_Vegetables at 11:09 AM on February 20, 2019 [2 favorites]


I use NYTCooking constantly and I've never looked at the notes; I guess I'll have to go back and remedy that.

Absolutely, do so! In working with NYT recipes I've learned to never just plunge into cooking something without doing a deep dive through the comments, because almost always there are good suggestions or tweaks that even just from "mental tasting" I can tell will be an improvement and that I end up using to great satisfaction.
posted by Kat Allison at 11:15 AM on February 20, 2019 [7 favorites]


And I have to say they're a big improvement on comments on most cooking blogs/websites, which, while seldom hostile or toxic, are usually some variation of "Oh myyyy that sounds so GOOOOD I can't wait to make it, yum! :):):) "
posted by Kat Allison at 11:17 AM on February 20, 2019 [7 favorites]


I've always thought that instead of banning or deleteing bad comments from comment-driven sites, their text should be changed to something like 'xBongzilla69x said something racist and stupid.', which theoretically poisons xBongzilla69x's well of supporters and forces valuable comments.

Something like the Kitten Setting on jscalzi's blog would also work. And be considerably more amusing.

....I mean, it strikes me that "good moderation makes for better comments and notes" is an obvious conclusion. But I suspect that making people pay for access does even more; I can't even read the recipes themselves on the site, much less read the comments. I also know from bitter experience that the NY Times site will let you look at maybe one page before they cut you off, so the bar to entry is higher than usual there; I'd wager that this has as much, if not more, to do with the quality of comments than the moderation. For someone to comment they have to really be invested, to the point that they paid for it, so you don't get the same kind of drive-by jerkitude.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 11:18 AM on February 20, 2019 [2 favorites]


'xBongzilla69x said something racist and stupid.'

You take that back, xBongzilla69x is a dear friend of mine and they would never
posted by showbiz_liz at 11:47 AM on February 20, 2019 [3 favorites]


They actually make it harder to work around their paywall for ordinary articles than they do for their recipes. I think they now offer a recipe-only subscription, which I've been considering, as I miss their recipes more than anything else since I cancelled my subscription after one too many Haberman puff pieces.
posted by praemunire at 11:48 AM on February 20, 2019


The NYT paywall is devious. I just today got a "one free month of Cooking only" thing, just to read this article. Coincidentally, just today they announced free NYTimes for Californians with library cards.
posted by Nelson at 11:52 AM on February 20, 2019 [3 favorites]


I just realized I meant "easier." The recipes are more jealously-guarded.
posted by praemunire at 12:03 PM on February 20, 2019


even just from "mental tasting" I can tell will be an improvement

That is a perfect phrase!! Hereby requesting permission to steal it.

-----
By the way, I'll just mention that when I search the Internet for a recipe (ex. for a particular dish, or ideas for using a particular ingredient), a NYT recipe is often in the results. Granted that doesn't let me casually browse the whole site, but it's better than nothing.
posted by Greg_Ace at 12:51 PM on February 20, 2019


although effective moderation will prevent RavensFan74 from sharing his opinions about [hateful shit] under a chicken marsala recipe,

The important side effect is that when RavensFan74 is talking about chicken marsala, he's not thinking or talking about hateful shit. And he's reinforcing non-hateful beliefs and support networks.

Which altogether means that yes, less hate expressed means less hate exists.
posted by ambrosen at 12:55 PM on February 20, 2019 [4 favorites]


I think the comments on a lot of cooking sites and blogs often are pretty good. Serious Eats, Homesick Texan, Maangchi, I often learn something from the reader comments. There's something about home cooking that brings out goodness in people.

Ironic, since I came to this thread directly after reading this article on Serious Eats about Benihana and cultural appropriation and the loathsome comments accusing the author of being an "SJW" and "injecting politics into food writing."
posted by ultraviolet catastrophe at 5:22 PM on February 20, 2019 [1 favorite]


Does this mean they remove the inevitable "I didn't have any flour so I used a burning tyre instead, and it ended up awful. 0/5" comments that seem to plague every recipe site on the web?
posted by pompomtom at 7:15 PM on February 20, 2019 [4 favorites]


I'm struck by how closely the food editor's philosophy mirrors the philosophy in AskMe:

“The call to action was to leave a note on the recipe that helps make it better. That’s very different from ‘Leave a comment on a recipe.’ ...we don’t have comments. We have notes.”
posted by mediareport at 1:40 AM on February 21, 2019


« Older Street kitten meets pitbull by way of Pixar   |   This Cat Does Not Exist Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments