Why Is The Daily Mail Blocking Comments On This Story

[sp1814]

Two young men have ruined their lives, and taken another...but the strange thing here is that the Daily Mail have blocked comments on the story.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-3469474/Man-gets-32-years-sickening-murder-Muslim-pensioner.html

Normally, we see comments blocks on online news sources when the trail is underway, but in this case, the trail is over and the sentences have been delivered.

So can anyone explain why comments are suspended???

[viv41]

It baffles me too. I sometimes go to comment on a story and it says 'we are no longer taking comments etc ......' and I think, well why?

[Bathsheba]

probably because they would be flooded with sick and ignorant racist remarks.

Baths
x x

[Gromit]

There may be a separate trial with another un-named defendant which is still underway or yet to proceed (or there may be a defendant yet to be sentenced), and reporting restrictions cover ALL of the defendants.
I doubt it is censorship and lean towards a legal reason.

[viv41]

But they often print those type of remarks Baths.

[sp1814]

Gromit

That sounds plausible, but I am almost certain there were only two killers in this instance, and they've both been sentenced.

But then, it's possible that others were involved after the fact (harbouring or perverting the course of justice) and their trails are yet to happen.

[ToraToraTora]

As a regular reader SP, I'd have hoped you would know that.

[anotheoldgit]

Plenty of comments here.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3469732/Thugs-killed-Muslim-grandfather-jailed-46-years.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&;ns_campaign=1490

[Gromit]

// two killers in this instance, and they've both been sentenced. //

That explans it. In your report, the report is about one of the defendants, and does not mention the other, presumably because he hadn't yet been sentence. AOGs report is later when both had been sentenced, and comments were then allowed.

[wolf63]

sp - what sort of trail? Bicycle?

I was reading a couple of DM articles earlier and was surprised to find that there were no comments but I didn't investigate further.

[youngmafbog]

Go on AOG's link baths. I trust an apology to DM readers will follow shortly from you?

[anotheoldgit]

sp1814

No ulterior motive then, it would seem, next!

[Baldric]

///That explans it. In your report, the report is about one of the defendants, and does not mention the other, presumably because he hadn't yet been sentence.///

Really? . . . from the link in the OP

///Jones, of East Bawtry Road, Rotherham, was found guilty of murder last week. Hunt, of Doncaster Road, Rotherham, was cleared of murder but found guilty of manslaughter on Monday.///

[Bathsheba]

youngmaf...still angry at the ric.ror discovery? ;)

Baths
x x

[Baldric]

And from AOGs link

///Two racist thugs have been jailed for killing a grandfather as he walked to morning prayers.
Dale Jones and Damien Hunt, both 30, were found guilty of the unprovoked killing of Mushin Ahmed and have been jailed for a combined term of 46 years behind bars.///

[sp1814]

Gromit

The report I linked to refers to both of the defendants, saying one got 32 years, and the other 14 years. So it begs the question, why aren't comments allowed?

divebuddy - is there any chance you could grow up for a bit. My question related specifically to the Daily Mail, not their readers.

[naomi24]

sp, from the Daily Mail.

//8. Why are comments not allowed under some articles?
We do not allow comments under some articles or blogs. This is usually for legal reasons.//

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/article-1204078/Frequently-Asked-Questions.html


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/article-1204078/Frequently-Asked-Questions.html#ixzz41rPPrR00
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[Gromit]

Sp,

They already had comments running on this story (see AOGs link). The iteration in your link was later, so they did not enable comments on that.

So they didn't want to split the commenting being numerous iterations of the same story.

Not sure why you keep hammering it is a conspiracy when it quite clearly isn't.

[sp1814]

divebuddy

The subject of the question is the Daily Mail.

The structure of the question clearly defines 'Daily Mail' as the subject, because it has a trailing verb after it 'blocking'.

If I had asked, "Why Do You Think Daily Mail Readers Are Not Allowed To Comment This Story?" then you would be perfectly correct that I was lining up to take a swipe at the readership of the paper.

But I wasn't.

I thought it was quite clear.