According to a note on the site's homepage Monday, "The shorter length will allow for an improved experience for commenters and readers alike."
The statement is good news for readers who roll their eyes when commenters hog the soapbox. But for Internet users who view commenting as an opportunity to see reactions that would have otherwise been limited to personal letter or email, it's a step in the wrong direction. Though 14 tweets' worth of discussion is still a fair amount, the change opens the door for further character cutting in the future.
The new limit was inspired by feedback from readers and Times employees, Aron Pilhofer, editor of interactive news, told The Wrap.
"5,000 [characters] is a lot," Pilhofer said. "That's not a comment, that's an article."
The shorter character limit will change community behavior. Readers who are used to writing essay-length comments may become more blunt as they aim to get to their point faster. Or they may work around the limit by breaking thoughts into multiple comments. Still, the shorter length will help Times moderators get through comments more quickly, allowing them to quell inappropriate threads with greater speed.
In late May the BBC dropped its limit to 400 characters -- 20 characters less than is allowed for a Facebook status update.
The BBC's character cut inspired Martin Belam, lead user experience and information architect at The Guardian, to survey the comment character counts of a range of U.S. and UK news media sites. Here's a sample of his findings, updated to include The New York Times' recent change:
Website,
Comment Character Count
BBC News
400
Facebook (status update)
420
YouTube
500
Daily Mail
1,000
The Huffington Post
1,800*
The New York Times
2,000
The Sun
2,000
The Washington Post
3,000
The Times (U.K.)
3,000
The Guardian
5,000
Facebook (comment)
8,000
CNN
10,000
Al Jazeera
10,000
The Telegraph
10,000
*The actual limit imposed on Huffington Post is 250 words, which equates to 1,820 characters.
What do you think of The Times' comment character cut? Will it truly make for a more inviting commenting space or is the site infringing on commenters' rights? Sound off in the thread below -- we won't cut you off.