After years of complaints and criticisms from other papers, these types of comments are STILL allowed on the News-Times site.
These comments were found in the article on the smell coming from the AWD transfer station. The snapshots were captured at 2:30 PM. Take note of the amount of time the comments have been posted (located to the right of the "username").
What the News-Times doesn't understand that by allowing this type of crap to be posted on their site, they're just as responsible for the racist tone in Danbury as the xenophobes that spew this bullshit.
This needs to stop and the solution is simple.
Solution 1:
Change the comment system from an anonymous to a sign-up service. In other words, in order to post a comment, you would have to sign up with an email address and you would not be allowed to post a comment without an email verification.
Solution 2:
Get rid of the comment section of the site and go back to the old format where comments are only allowed in the message boards (if I'm correct, this was the old, old format prior to 2006 when comments to articles were allowed).
What will it take for the News-Times to get the message that allowing these types of comments are WRONG.
Flooding the News-Times with phone calls?
A MASSIVE protest?
Requesting businesses that purchase ads to write the News-Times and threaten to pull their ads?
Whatever the case, it's become crystal clear that a call for a radical change to the comment section of the News-Times is LONG OVERDUE.
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
