The attitude of the NZZ shows that there are media priests at work here who want to give a rallying cry to alleged populism. In doing so, the media missionaries are muzzled by all those citizens who have previously been able to write their opinions uncensored online. However, the editorial team is stifling consumers' insightful expression of vietnam rcs data opinion - all under the pretext of fairness, on the grounds that debates are more objective. Nobody has any objections to deleting posts that violate legal provisions (personal rights, etc.). But when journalists exclude undesirable posts and prefer those comments that correspond to their own ideology, the filtering becomes questionable.
In my opinion, 20min.ch has dealt with the issue of comment columns in an exemplary manner. of the public's opinion. And the portal also allows posts that are less squeamish to stand. The editors do not censor as much as, for example, the "Tages-Anzeiger". The open communication culture is also evident where readers can click on their approval or rejection of comments without any hurdles.
Conclusion: The best journalism is impartial. It allows both opinions and opposing opinions to be heard.