Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Online comments within news articles are a key way people share opinions. Discovering insightful comments can, however, be challenging for readers. A solution to this problem is using comment curation, whereby professional editors select the highest quality comments manually --- referred to as ''editor-picks''. This paper studies the growing use of professional editor-curation for user-generated comments. We focus on the New York Times as a case study, using a dataset covering 80k articles. We study the characteristics of editor-pick comments, highlighting how editor criteria vary across news sections (e.g. sports, entertainment). We find that editor-pick comments tend to be longer, more relevant to the article, positive in sentiment, and contain low toxicity. Our analysis further reveals that editors within different news sections exhibit differing criteria when they perform comment selection. Thus, we finally propose a set of models that can automatically identify good candidate editor-picks. Our ultimate goal is to reduce editor and journalistic workload, increasing productivity and the quality of curated comments.
He et al. (Tue,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: