Your comments excluded, of course, dear reader, though there are more posts here than comments by people on those posts. The reference is to the interminable slog of newspaper comments which place a long stream of dreck at the end of that carefully edited story.
I miss the days of carefully considered letters to the editor - when you could count on not every letter getting published, when you were limited to a certain number of words, and when if you were wildly off-topic your words might never see the light of day. An editor would pick a selection of letters to run, and some wouldn't make the cut.
Publishers who have well-edited work up front shouldn't diminish the impact of their work by giving the great unwashed Internet access to their platform to post whatever the heck they please. It detracts from the work to have unedited commentary on it posted so close to the original. At a minimum any comments should be held for approval before being posted, just so that the balance of power tips over to the editor and not to the drooling, mouth-breathing commentariat.