For years, a comment box under every article was standard. Then many news sites and blogs turned theirs off. The reasons they gave were often the same: abuse, the cost of moderating it, and the discovery that almost nobody was commenting.
If you are thinking about closing yours, or already have, the question is what to put in its place so you still hear from readers. This post goes through the options and what each one gives up.
The short answer
Publishers mostly closed comments because few readers used them, a small group wrote most of them, and moderation cost more than it gave back. To replace them, split up what comments did. For "did this article work?", ask a short question on the page. For corrections and longer thoughts, give readers an email address and answer it. For conversation between readers, run a moderated community space. None of these is a public comment thread, so if open debate under each article is what you valued, a community space is the closest you will get.
Why publishers closed their comment sections
One of the best-documented cases is NPR, the US public radio network, which turned off comments on its website in August 2016. Its public editor published the numbers behind the decision. In July 2016 the site had nearly 33 million unique users and 491,000 comments, but those comments came from just 19,400 people: 0.06% of users. Over June and July, 4,300 users wrote 67% of all comments.
The same post noted that the commenting system got more expensive as more comments were posted, and in some months had cost twice its budget. Complaints about harassment between commenters had been growing too.
Wider surveys show the same pattern. The Reuters Institute's Digital News Report 2023 found that, across markets, only around a fifth of people (22%) actively take part in online news by posting or commenting, and around half (47%) don't take part at all. It also found that some of the conversation has moved to private messaging groups, where people talk with friends "in a less toxic atmosphere".
What your comment section actually did
Before choosing a replacement, list the jobs your comments were doing. Most comment sections did several at once:
- Feedback on the article: whether it was clear, fair or useful.
- Corrections: readers pointing out a wrong date, figure or name.
- Questions the article left open.
- Discussion between readers, which some of them came back for.
- A sense that the publication listens.
No single replacement does all five. A comment box tried to, and a few loud voices often drowned out everyone else. Separate tools can each do one job properly.
Alternatives to comment sections, compared
| Alternative | Replaces | Public? | The catch |
|---|---|---|---|
| A short question at the end of the article | Feedback on the article | No, only your team sees the answers | Readers can't talk to each other, and anonymous answers can't be replied to |
| A corrections and feedback email address | Corrections, longer thoughts, questions | No | Someone has to read and answer it |
| Reader letters you choose to publish | Visible reader voices | Yes, selected by you | Slow, and only the letters you pick appear |
| A members' forum or chat group | Discussion between readers | To members | Needs a community manager and clear rules |
| Social media posts about the article | Discussion and reactions | Yes | The conversation happens on someone else's platform, under their rules |
| Live Q&As with the writer | Questions, a sense of being heard | Yes | Takes the writer's time, so it suits big stories only |
Private feedback or public comments: the trade-offs
Moving from public comments to private feedback changes who answers and what you get. Be clear about both sides.
- You gain more voices. A one-tap question asks nothing of the reader, so you hear from the quiet majority, not only the few who like to argue in public.
- You gain less moderation. Nothing is published, so nothing needs approving before other readers see it.
- You lose the conversation. Readers can no longer reply to each other, and for some of your most loyal readers that was the point.
- You lose visible proof that readers are listened to. Make up for it by saying what you changed because of reader feedback, in a note on the article or in your newsletter.
How to close comments without losing readers
-
Say what is changing and why
A short note explaining the decision, with the honest reasons, does more than switching the box off quietly.
-
Put the replacement in the same spot
Readers who used to scroll to the comments should find a question or a feedback link there instead.
-
Give an address for corrections
A visible email address at the end of every article, answered by a named person or desk.
-
Decide what happens to old comments
Keep them read-only, archive them, or remove them. Tell readers which.
-
Show what readers changed
Every month or so, publish a short note on corrections and changes that came from reader feedback.
Example
Example: a local news site turns off comments
Say you run a local news site with a comment box under every story. A volunteer moderator spends two evenings a week on it, most threads are the same five people arguing, and advertisers have started asking about the tone.
You turn comments off and put two things where the box used to be. The first is a question, "Did this story tell you what you needed to know?", with Yes / No and then "What was missing?" with the options "Background", "What happens next", "Where to find out more" and "Something else". The second is a line with the newsroom email address for corrections.
A month later, council stories get far more No answers than other stories, and most of them pick "What happens next". So you add a short "What happens next" box to every council story. Corrections now arrive by email, where an editor checks them, instead of sitting unread in a thread. The five regular commenters move to the reader group you set up, where your moderator spends one evening a week instead of two.
Where Asklet fits, and where it doesn't
Asklet is not a comment system. It asks short questions at the end of an article and shows the answers to your team only, per article and per path. Readers can't see each other's answers or reply to them, and nothing they write is published.
Answers are anonymous: readers don't sign in, and email addresses and phone numbers typed into a free text answer are removed before they are stored. That makes it a good fit for the "did this article work?" job, and the wrong tool for corrections that need a reply or for discussion between readers. Pair it with a corrections address and, if your readers want to talk to each other, a community space.
Your next steps
-
List the jobs your comments did
Feedback, corrections, questions, discussion, a sense of being heard.
-
Pick one replacement for each job you care about
A question on the page, an email address, a community space.
-
Put the main replacement where the comment box was
Same place, so readers who scrolled to the comments still find a way to respond.
-
Tell readers what changed and why
A short, honest note, with the new ways to reach you.
-
Report back on what readers told you
A regular note on the corrections and changes that came from their feedback.
Try these steps on your own site. Asklet adds the questions to every page with one snippet. Free plan, no card needed. Compare the plans.
Start freeCommon questions
Why did so many news sites remove comments?
The common reasons were the cost of moderation, abuse between commenters, and low use. When NPR closed its comments in 2016, 0.06% of its users were commenting, and a few thousand people wrote most of the comments.
What is the best alternative to a comment section?
It depends on what your comments were for. For feedback on articles, a short question at the end of each one. For corrections, an email address someone answers. For conversation between readers, a moderated community space.
Will closing comments hurt engagement?
It removes one way for a small group of readers to take part. If you replace it with something quicker, such as a one-tap question, more readers usually respond, but they respond privately. Keep a space for the readers who want conversation.
Can Asklet replace my comment section?
Only part of it. Asklet collects anonymous feedback on each article for your team, but it doesn't publish anything or let readers reply to each other. Use it for feedback on articles, alongside an email address and, if you want discussion, a community space.
Related
Sources
More from the blog
- Privacy and law EU cookie consent changes: where the Digital Omnibus stands in October 2026 9 min read
- Privacy and law Session replay and pixel lawsuits: what website owners should know 9 min read
- Privacy and law How to make a feedback widget accessible, and what the European Accessibility Act asks 9 min read