FT web site changes

Does the head screw on and off that Michael Amini guy?

bob wexler was a super guy and everyone who knew him would love to say something nice,but you dont have a comment section.sad but true....bob we will miss you

bob wexler was a super guy and everyone who knew him would love to say something nice,but you dont have a comment section.sad but true....bob we will miss you

bob wexler was a super guy and everyone who knew him would love to say something nice,but you dont have a comment section.sad but true....bob we will miss you

bob wexler was a super guy and everyone who knew him would love to say something nice,but you dont have a comment section.sad but true....bob we will miss you

bob wexler was a super guy and everyone who knew him would love to say something nice,but you dont have a comment section.sad but true....bob we will miss you

Bob Lephart, thank you for your comments. You summarized our position perfectly. The "talkback" section had, indeed, morphed into a vehicle for petty, mean-spirited personal attacks, and it was becoming an embarrassment.
Robert, you are correct that the NY Times and many major newspapers maintain robust comment sections, but the difference is that these publications have large staffs of people who do nothing but screen comments before they are posted on the website. The Times, for example, has 14 full-time people assigned to this task -- which is larger than FT's entire writing and editing staff.
The largest newspaper in our area, the News & Record in Greensboro, recently placed significant restrictions on online comments because it was facing many of the same issues FT has experienced. The most noteworthy change is that comments cannot be added at night or on weekends, when there is no one available to police the section.
We at FT simply don't have the manpower to screen comments before they are posted, and we were spending an inordinate amount of time removing inappropriate comments after they were posted -- a classic case of the barn door being closed after the horse had escaped.

Interesting choice, it doesn't do much for the rep that FT has for supporting the good ol boys of the biz-I guess the regular habit of telling the news of the top 100 and forget the rest will continue-now without the option of anyone disagreeing
I was hoping the new ownership would bring our only trade mag into current times..

Clint:
When Ray responded to me asking if I were the kind of person "who equates personal attacks, vulgarity, obscenity, and personal promotion with dialogue"? I would say he was the one being reckless, careless and pushing buttons. That is why I pointed out that he was following in the yellow journalism style of Beck, Limbaugh and Gingrich.

FT may not be the only media cutting off commentary, but such a close mindedness is certainly not shared by internationally respected papers like the New York Times. If they feel it is more important to keep dialogue going even if there are some tasteless dissenters, what makes a trade paper so radically different? Why can the NYT be open to all commentary and our insular industry not be open to it?

Ray,

I just read your piece on the site change and speaking for myself I am glad you took down the comments section. It’s sad that it morphed into hit pieces on different individuals and companies in our great industry. We are all running tighter in this economy and the last thing any of us needs are unnecessary distractions from our responsibilities to our employers, employees, customers and your case readers.

Some of the things that I read were unbelievably insulting to some people and companies, most who have provided much good to our furniture community so I for one am happy you made the change.

Thanks to you and your staff for the leading industry publication.

Best regards,

Bob Lephart
Vice President - Sales & Marketing
Sunrise Home Furnishings

Ray is out today, so I'll take a stab at answering:
This newspaper does allow for blogs and opinions as Robert should be able to see from his own recent posts. What it has removed is the ability for some readers to recklessly trash people and companies at the bottom of news reports. As reporters, we try hard to keep our opinions out of our stories. Now we’re keeping other anonymous and sometimes careless opinions out as well.

I use words like “recklessly” and “careless” because Robert illustrates it with his own words.” “On par with Beck, Limbaugh or Gingrich.” What purpose is he serving here other than to push a few buttons?

“If the major newspapers and magazines in this country can allow for blogging opinion, what makes Furniture Today so radically different?” Careless in that … well, Furniture/Today DOES allow for blogging opinion (See all the blogs and additional opinions such as Robert’s).

Furniture/Today isn’t the only media outlet that has cut off commentary on news stories. The ratcheting up of abuse in this outlet has many reassessing the feature if they’ve offered it in the first place.

Ray, your compulsion to add your gratuitous comment of: "Plus, frankly, in your previous post, which I am compelled to add, certainly gives you an opportunity to voice an opinion, you believe FT to be irrelevant. While I personally would not want to blog or write for a publication I believed was irrelevant...,"
did not take into consideration your earlier invitation of:

"If you don't like what you see in the mirror, then work to change it."
I thought my offer showed I was willing to work to change it.

You also never answered my question:
"
If the major newspapers and magazines in this country can allow for blogging opinion, what makes Furniture Today so radically different?"

Robert:
The fact that we have some 17 or bloggers and the fact that you reference them makes me have to believe that you realize we do allow bloggers to share their expertise and point of view.

And, since you've read our bloggers, you realize that each has a specialty--we have a lawyer, a social networking specialist, a logistics experts, a retail leader who writes on leadership, etc.

Forgive me, but as I've not had the pleasure of meeting you, I am unclear as to what area of expertise you would like to bring to FT.

Plus, frankly, in your previous post, which I am compelled to add, certainly gives you an opportunity to voice an opinion, you believe FT to be irrelevant. While I personally would not want to blog or write for a publication I believed was irrelevant, send me an email, let me know your background and expertise and outline the topics you would like to blog about.
rallegrezza@furnituretoday.com

Well, Ray, whatever did I write that would have prompted you to ask if I were the kind of person "who equates personal attacks, vulgarity, obscenity, and personal promotion with dialogue"? I would not condone such things.
I would say that your response is on par with a Beck, Limbaugh or Gingrich style of response. Obviously you have decided to kill the provocative positive dialogue to keep out the garbage, which you could cull out easily like other blogs do. I must point out that you allow regular bloggers to promote themselves via the articles they write like the ones from The Kaleidoscope Group etc. If the major newspapers and magazines in this country can allow for blogging opinion, what makes Furniture Today so radically different?
The silvering on your "mirror" point of view is tarnished with your personal editorial prejudice. I would love to write regular blogs for FT if you would allow it and allow feedback. I would be most pleased to write to work for change and awaken the status quo stasis. Please let all of us know if you are open to opinions like any other major publication in the free world is.

Robert:

While I defend with my life your right to disagree with me, I don't agree with your points and want to be clear that we intend to stick to our guns on this one.

Your supposition about FT's intent to uphold what you see as the industry's "lack of visionary creativity for survival in a global economy," is your opinion and I disagree with it.

FT's role is not to uphold anyone's view. The paper's mission is to report the news, which it does.

And rather than uphold a particular world view, if anything, FT holds up a mirror that reflects the nature of the industry. It’s clear that you are unhappy with the industry, but don't blame us for that. If you don't like what you see in the mirror, then work to change it.

Frankly, we did not like what we saw on the talkback section—nasty, unproductive comments that did nothing to make the industry better or wiser.

If you’re the kind that equates personal attacks, vulgarity, obscenity and commercial promotion with "dialogue," then you may want to get your news elsewhere anyway.

I'm sorry that you feel FT is not up to your standards.

Thanks for writing.

mr. mark you have hit the nail perfectly,the industry we once knew is on a downhill spiral and ft is the leading source of news for those in the industry.what could possibly be wrong with comments positive or negative that responded to the news you ,ft printed.the many people who did respond are a small group that wants to vent their opinion on many subjects and stories you wrote,whats wrong with comments that speak of the shady goings on that are so prevalent in our industry and who is the decision maker to pull comments about your advertisers that get smeared in the replies to whats written?the new owners seem very scared of honest opinions that make the stories you print face the reality of people who want to clarify what they think of whats written by your staff.example ; the aico /frankel story was full of comments about the people who were sued in court and the fact the design from these companies involved winning money from copies that were copies themselves. never saw so many people make comments about the suit and who was involved ,was interesting and good info to read about.
all gone now,and any reviews by public is history for the many readers who cared about truth and whats correct in our industry.the sealy logo on a bedding report and all the people who responded was quite unusual and also had many comments about this story reporting a one sided attempt to show which mattress was best.you stated it was sponsored by sealy? what did that mean?will never know now ...seems strange all of a sudden to pull comments when so much is going on in the fractured state of furniture and people want to respond to whats been written.

FT is the major news magazine for the US furniture industry. The US furniture industry has been very busy committing suicide for the past 10 years. I can only suppose that the magazine that reports on such an industry would uphold the industry's lack of visionary creativity for survival in a global economy. It appears that your policies cater more to your US advertisers than to your readership. Consequently we have a US publication which reports on an industry that has been very successful at rendering itself irrelevant. That makes FT a publication which has become as irrelevant as the industry it reports on. You never report on the meaning behind corporate decisions. You never voice opinions with insight on our industry. Your job should be more than just parroting press releases. You should be a voice for survival. Shouldberg at HFN is far more enlightened than you are. Perhaps it is because he is NY based. If the NYT can allow commentary, I find it inconceivable that you have chosen to disallow commentary. Perhaps your new ownership is another corporation owned by Fox. Closing down dialogue is one more nail in the coffin of a close minded industry. It certainly does not reflect the actions of an educated free speech audience. What it does reflect is a fear based, intolerant editorial decision supported by an industry in NC that believes life begins and ends in a rice carved bed only.

I hope that comments can come back for registered users who use their real names. Often there is great input following news stories. Especially things of controversy or somewhere that we need/want to offer congratulations. FT's writers do a great job. Keep it up. Maybe you will find a solution to the comment issue :)

"M", read the article. Did you read some of the useless garabage/comments posted that brought nothing to the conversation? I can only guess what could not be posted. Remember, you cannot just yell "fire" for no reason and not expected to be punished... Thank you FT..

"M", read the article. Did you read some of the useless garabage/comments posted that brought nothing to the conversation? I can only guess what could not be posted. Remember, you cannot just yell "fire" for no reason and not expected to be punished... Thank you FT..

So everyone is punished for a few ignorant idiots. Oh well, I guess the heat from the advertisers got to be to much for F/T-guess we move on to the alternative. Goodbye F/T.

So everyone is punished for a few ignorant idiots. Oh well, I guess the heat from the advertisers got to be to much for F/T-guess we move on to the alternative. Goodbye F/T.

Thank you to those who gave us the opportunity to discuss, offer different opinions and ideas but then ruined it with not being able to converse in a professional manner. We all grow older but it seems for some, not much wiser.