Editor’s note: This article replaces content originally published in 2005. The original exchange captured an early inflection point in how bloggers understood their responsibilities as publishers. We’ve rewritten this piece to reflect how those questions have evolved—and intensified—over the past two decades.
Back in 2005, Robert Scoble, then Microsoft’s most visible blogger, made an argument that still echoes through every comment section, social media platform, and community forum on the internet.
The Blog Herald had asked a pointed question: what about free speech, Scoble? His response was blunt. You want free speech? Get your own blog. Comments on someone else’s site are their responsibility, their space, their rules.
Nearly two decades later, the tension he identified has only deepened. And the implications for bloggers and digital publishers are more consequential than ever.
The question of who controls speech on a blog is not abstract. It is operational. It affects your legal exposure, your brand reputation, your community culture, and your mental health. For experienced creators, understanding where the boundaries of free expression actually fall on your own platform is not a philosophical luxury. It is a strategic necessity.
The Blog as Private Property, Not Public Square
Scoble’s core argument was simple and largely correct. A blog is not a public square. It is privately owned digital space. The person who runs it bears responsibility for what appears on it.
Comments, trackbacks, user-generated content of any kind: these all exist at the discretion of the site owner. Free speech, as a legal principle, protects individuals from government censorship. It does not guarantee anyone a platform on someone else’s website.
This distinction matters more now than it did in 2005. The internet was smaller then. Blogging was still a relatively intimate act. Today, a single inflammatory comment on a well-trafficked blog can trigger legal threats, coordinated harassment campaigns, or algorithmic suppression. The stakes of what you allow on your site have grown exponentially.
Consider the legal landscape.
In the United States, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act generally protects site owners from liability for user-generated content. But that protection is not absolute, and it varies significantly across jurisdictions. In the EU, the Digital Services Act imposes new obligations on platforms to address illegal content. Even for small publishers, the direction of regulation is toward more responsibility, not less.
The practical reality is this: when someone posts something defamatory, illegal, or harmful in your comment section, it is your domain name attached to it. It is your reputation search engines associate with it. The romantic notion that a blog’s comment section should be an unmoderated free-for-all was always naive. Now it is genuinely reckless.
Why Comment Moderation Is a Strategic Act
There is a tendency among bloggers, especially those who have been at it for years, to see comment moderation as a chore. Something to delegate or automate and forget about. But moderation is not janitorial work. It is editorial work. It shapes the identity of your site as directly as the posts you publish.
Think about the blogs and online communities you actually respect. The ones where the discussion adds value. In almost every case, someone is making intentional decisions about what kind of discourse is welcome. Not censoring dissent, but establishing standards. There is a meaningful difference between deleting a thoughtful critique and removing spam, hate speech, or someone using your platform to promote their own agenda at the expense of your readers.
Scoble noted in his original post that his personal policy was to never delete comments. That was a choice that worked for him at the time, given his audience and his tolerance for noise. But it is not a universal best practice. For most publishers, especially those building a brand or a business around their content, unmoderated comments are a liability. They dilute the reader experience. They create legal risk. And they signal to your most thoughtful readers that you do not care about the quality of the conversation.
The best approach is to define your moderation policy clearly, publish it, and enforce it consistently. This is not about silencing people. It is about being honest that your site is your responsibility. You set the tone. You define the boundaries. Anyone who objects is free to do exactly what Scoble suggested: start their own blog.
The Entitlement Problem Has Gotten Worse
One of the sharpest lines in Scoble’s 2005 post was his statement: “I HATE entitlement.” He was reacting to the assumption that having access to someone’s comment section constituted a right. That assumption has only metastasized in the years since.
Social media trained an entire generation of internet users to believe that every platform owes them a voice. The architecture of Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube blurred the line between publishing and commenting until the distinction nearly disappeared. When someone is accustomed to firing off replies on a global platform with minimal consequences, they carry that expectation to your blog, your newsletter, your community forum.
For bloggers, this creates a recurring friction. You want engagement. You want readers to feel heard. But you also need to protect your space. The entitlement mindset frames any moderation as censorship, any editorial judgment as suppression. This is intellectually dishonest, and experienced creators need to stop apologizing for it.
Running a blog that accepts comments is an act of generosity. You are offering readers a place to respond, to add their perspective, to be part of a conversation. That offer comes with conditions. The moment someone treats your comment section as their personal megaphone, or worse, as a weapon, you are not only justified in moderating. You are obligated to.
Where Experienced Bloggers Still Get This Wrong
The most common mistake is not the absence of a moderation policy. Most serious bloggers have one. The mistake is inconsistency. Enforcing rules selectively, based on how busy you are, how much you agree with the commenter, or how visible the comment is, erodes trust faster than having no rules at all.
Another overlooked issue is the assumption that turning off comments solves the problem. Many high-profile bloggers and publishers have disabled comments entirely over the past decade. Some for good reasons. But shutting down the conversation is not the same as managing it. When you remove comments, you push the discussion to social media platforms where you have even less control. The conversation about your content still happens. You just lose any ability to shape it.
A more sustainable approach is to be intentional about where and how you host discussion. Some publishers move comments to a members-only area, which raises the quality of discourse by requiring a small commitment. Others use tools like Coral to create structured, moderated discussion spaces. The key is to make a deliberate choice rather than defaulting to whatever your CMS provides out of the box.
There is also a psychological dimension that rarely gets discussed. Moderating comments, especially negative or aggressive ones, takes a toll. It is a form of emotional labor that accumulates over time. If you are a solo publisher, this is something to plan for. Build moderation time into your workflow. Set boundaries around when you engage with comments. Recognize that protecting your space is also protecting your capacity to keep creating.
Free Speech and the Long Game of Trust
The deeper issue beneath all of this is trust. When you moderate your blog thoughtfully and consistently, you are telling your readers something important: this space has standards. The people who value that will stay. The people who do not were never your audience.
Trust is the most valuable currency in digital publishing. It takes years to build and moments to destroy. A single unmoderated comment section full of spam, toxicity, or misinformation can undermine the credibility of content you spent months producing. The irony is that the bloggers most committed to “free speech” in their comment sections often end up with the least trustworthy sites.
Scoble understood this instinctively in 2005, even if the language of the era was less precise. Your blog is an extension of your identity. Everything on it, including the comments, reflects on you. Taking ownership of that is not an act of censorship. It is an act of editorial integrity.
For publishers building something meant to last, the principle is straightforward. Define your standards. Communicate them clearly. Enforce them without apology. Let people who disagree exercise their actual free speech right, which is to publish on their own platform, under their own name, bearing their own consequences.
Grounding It for Today
The conversation Scoble started almost twenty years ago has not been resolved. It has simply moved to larger stages with higher stakes. Every blogger, newsletter operator, and community builder faces the same fundamental question: what are you willing to be responsible for?
The answer should not be everything anyone wants to say. It should be everything that serves your readers, protects your integrity, and sustains the space you have built. That is not a restriction on free speech. It is the exercise of editorial judgment, which is the very thing that makes independent publishing valuable in the first place.
If you are running a blog in 2024 and beyond, treat your comment section with the same care you treat your content. Moderate with intention. Set boundaries without guilt. And remember that the most powerful act of free expression available to you is not what you allow others to say on your site. It is what you choose to publish on it yourself.
Lachlan is the founder of HackSpirit and a longtime explorer of the digital world’s deeper currents. With a background in psychology and over a decade of experience in SEO and content strategy, Lachlan brings a calm, introspective voice to conversations about creator burnout, digital purpose, and the “why” behind online work. His writing invites readers to slow down, think long-term, and rediscover meaning in an often metrics-obsessed world. Lachlan is an author of the best-selling book Hidden Secrets of Buddhism: How to Live with Maximum Impact and Minimum Ego.
When your comment section becomes someone else’s lawsuit
Editor’s note: This article replaces content originally published in 2005. The original exchange captured an early inflection point in how bloggers understood their responsibilities as publishers. We’ve rewritten this piece to reflect how those questions have evolved—and intensified—over the past two decades.
Back in 2005, Robert Scoble, then Microsoft’s most visible blogger, made an argument that still echoes through every comment section, social media platform, and community forum on the internet.
The Blog Herald had asked a pointed question: what about free speech, Scoble? His response was blunt. You want free speech? Get your own blog. Comments on someone else’s site are their responsibility, their space, their rules.
Nearly two decades later, the tension he identified has only deepened. And the implications for bloggers and digital publishers are more consequential than ever.
The question of who controls speech on a blog is not abstract. It is operational. It affects your legal exposure, your brand reputation, your community culture, and your mental health. For experienced creators, understanding where the boundaries of free expression actually fall on your own platform is not a philosophical luxury. It is a strategic necessity.
The Blog as Private Property, Not Public Square
Scoble’s core argument was simple and largely correct. A blog is not a public square. It is privately owned digital space. The person who runs it bears responsibility for what appears on it.
Comments, trackbacks, user-generated content of any kind: these all exist at the discretion of the site owner. Free speech, as a legal principle, protects individuals from government censorship. It does not guarantee anyone a platform on someone else’s website.
This distinction matters more now than it did in 2005. The internet was smaller then. Blogging was still a relatively intimate act. Today, a single inflammatory comment on a well-trafficked blog can trigger legal threats, coordinated harassment campaigns, or algorithmic suppression. The stakes of what you allow on your site have grown exponentially.
Consider the legal landscape.
In the United States, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act generally protects site owners from liability for user-generated content. But that protection is not absolute, and it varies significantly across jurisdictions. In the EU, the Digital Services Act imposes new obligations on platforms to address illegal content. Even for small publishers, the direction of regulation is toward more responsibility, not less.
The practical reality is this: when someone posts something defamatory, illegal, or harmful in your comment section, it is your domain name attached to it. It is your reputation search engines associate with it. The romantic notion that a blog’s comment section should be an unmoderated free-for-all was always naive. Now it is genuinely reckless.
Why Comment Moderation Is a Strategic Act
There is a tendency among bloggers, especially those who have been at it for years, to see comment moderation as a chore. Something to delegate or automate and forget about. But moderation is not janitorial work. It is editorial work. It shapes the identity of your site as directly as the posts you publish.
Think about the blogs and online communities you actually respect. The ones where the discussion adds value. In almost every case, someone is making intentional decisions about what kind of discourse is welcome. Not censoring dissent, but establishing standards. There is a meaningful difference between deleting a thoughtful critique and removing spam, hate speech, or someone using your platform to promote their own agenda at the expense of your readers.
Related Stories from The Blog Herald
Scoble noted in his original post that his personal policy was to never delete comments. That was a choice that worked for him at the time, given his audience and his tolerance for noise. But it is not a universal best practice. For most publishers, especially those building a brand or a business around their content, unmoderated comments are a liability. They dilute the reader experience. They create legal risk. And they signal to your most thoughtful readers that you do not care about the quality of the conversation.
The best approach is to define your moderation policy clearly, publish it, and enforce it consistently. This is not about silencing people. It is about being honest that your site is your responsibility. You set the tone. You define the boundaries. Anyone who objects is free to do exactly what Scoble suggested: start their own blog.
The Entitlement Problem Has Gotten Worse
One of the sharpest lines in Scoble’s 2005 post was his statement: “I HATE entitlement.” He was reacting to the assumption that having access to someone’s comment section constituted a right. That assumption has only metastasized in the years since.
Social media trained an entire generation of internet users to believe that every platform owes them a voice. The architecture of Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube blurred the line between publishing and commenting until the distinction nearly disappeared. When someone is accustomed to firing off replies on a global platform with minimal consequences, they carry that expectation to your blog, your newsletter, your community forum.
For bloggers, this creates a recurring friction. You want engagement. You want readers to feel heard. But you also need to protect your space. The entitlement mindset frames any moderation as censorship, any editorial judgment as suppression. This is intellectually dishonest, and experienced creators need to stop apologizing for it.
Running a blog that accepts comments is an act of generosity. You are offering readers a place to respond, to add their perspective, to be part of a conversation. That offer comes with conditions. The moment someone treats your comment section as their personal megaphone, or worse, as a weapon, you are not only justified in moderating. You are obligated to.
Where Experienced Bloggers Still Get This Wrong
The most common mistake is not the absence of a moderation policy. Most serious bloggers have one. The mistake is inconsistency. Enforcing rules selectively, based on how busy you are, how much you agree with the commenter, or how visible the comment is, erodes trust faster than having no rules at all.
What independent publishers learned from the ad market collapse in 2025
Another overlooked issue is the assumption that turning off comments solves the problem. Many high-profile bloggers and publishers have disabled comments entirely over the past decade. Some for good reasons. But shutting down the conversation is not the same as managing it. When you remove comments, you push the discussion to social media platforms where you have even less control. The conversation about your content still happens. You just lose any ability to shape it.
A more sustainable approach is to be intentional about where and how you host discussion. Some publishers move comments to a members-only area, which raises the quality of discourse by requiring a small commitment. Others use tools like Coral to create structured, moderated discussion spaces. The key is to make a deliberate choice rather than defaulting to whatever your CMS provides out of the box.
There is also a psychological dimension that rarely gets discussed. Moderating comments, especially negative or aggressive ones, takes a toll. It is a form of emotional labor that accumulates over time. If you are a solo publisher, this is something to plan for. Build moderation time into your workflow. Set boundaries around when you engage with comments. Recognize that protecting your space is also protecting your capacity to keep creating.
Free Speech and the Long Game of Trust
The deeper issue beneath all of this is trust. When you moderate your blog thoughtfully and consistently, you are telling your readers something important: this space has standards. The people who value that will stay. The people who do not were never your audience.
Trust is the most valuable currency in digital publishing. It takes years to build and moments to destroy. A single unmoderated comment section full of spam, toxicity, or misinformation can undermine the credibility of content you spent months producing. The irony is that the bloggers most committed to “free speech” in their comment sections often end up with the least trustworthy sites.
Scoble understood this instinctively in 2005, even if the language of the era was less precise. Your blog is an extension of your identity. Everything on it, including the comments, reflects on you. Taking ownership of that is not an act of censorship. It is an act of editorial integrity.
For publishers building something meant to last, the principle is straightforward. Define your standards. Communicate them clearly. Enforce them without apology. Let people who disagree exercise their actual free speech right, which is to publish on their own platform, under their own name, bearing their own consequences.
Grounding It for Today
The conversation Scoble started almost twenty years ago has not been resolved. It has simply moved to larger stages with higher stakes. Every blogger, newsletter operator, and community builder faces the same fundamental question: what are you willing to be responsible for?
The answer should not be everything anyone wants to say. It should be everything that serves your readers, protects your integrity, and sustains the space you have built. That is not a restriction on free speech. It is the exercise of editorial judgment, which is the very thing that makes independent publishing valuable in the first place.
If you are running a blog in 2024 and beyond, treat your comment section with the same care you treat your content. Moderate with intention. Set boundaries without guilt. And remember that the most powerful act of free expression available to you is not what you allow others to say on your site. It is what you choose to publish on it yourself.
Related Stories from The Blog Herald
Lachlan Brown
RECENT ARTICLES
Psychology says people who are drawn to writing aren’t trying to be heard — they’re trying to find out what they actually think, and the page is the only place where their internal voice slows down enough to be examined rather than merely experienced
Before the food creator boom, there was recipe finder
What your blog bounce rate is actually telling you
Jason Calacanis saw the content treadmill coming — and stepped off
How to write about a topic that’s been covered a thousand times
The short life of FoodPress and the lesson it left behind