NEW YORK, NY July 7 (DPI) – Two recent articles – a news feature on WSJ.com and an op-ed on WashingtonPost.com – highlighted the now-common affliction of online news: Comment boards are attracting armies of paid posters whose principal intention is to discredit an article’s premise.

And more readers are taking notice.

A news feature on WSJ.com yesterday focused on a third-party provider of online academic classes called 2U, which sells its services to prospective students by associating with big-name universities. Several readers pointed out that more than a few comments were first-time posters defending the private company.

“All the 2U shills commenting with their first posts are hilarious,” wrote one. “They must think WSJ readers are as gullible as the students they’re scamming. Come back in a week after their trial subscriptions have expired and see their accounts closed.”

Additional popular comments from regular readers:

Alert to WSJ and readers. It seems every person defending this company in this conversation has never commented before about any other WSJ article. If you click on their name, you can see for yourself.

So many comments here by 2U employees or ‘grads’ – all with tons of upvotes. So slimy.

I am really enjoying the comments below posted by female names, all of whom have only a single WSJ comment post, and all of whom claim to have worked for 2U and attest to their bona fides. I for one would like to thank “Fran,” “Kelly,” “Christa” and “Shate” for demonstrating that paid placement comment posting is alive and well. I am sure that the imminent sale of 2U to a company in India will have little impact on the company’s aggressive sales techniques and shady promotion schemes. Full disclosure: I am a tenured College Professor at a major public university, and I find this pretty reprehensible. Unfortunately, I also find it absolutely credible and believable in today’s higher education environment.

An op-ed by the Washington Post editorial board got headlined “Youngkin’s pragmatic school board picks offer hope for reform.” It pointed out – somewhat surprisingly for the left-leaning Washington Post – that the Virginia governor. a Republican, has appointed people with a broad range of political views, with a mandate to improve the state’s school system, even by introducing charter schools.

But even the mention of charter schools seemed to set off alarm bells among some readers posting on the attached comment board. The top comment virulently opposed charter schools. Among the most popular comments, nearly all of them excoriating both Youngkin and the Post for showing any support for him.

The most popular comment, which received 50 recommendations, 16 more than the second-most-popular comment:

I’m very happy with my county schools – paid for with my tax dollars and serving every family. Our county system is big enough to undertake all the experiments needed – and does.
Don’t need charters. Don’t want charters.
Why should we let a set of libertarian nutjobs and religious fruit cakes take over our schools?
Quit with this pro charter BS.

And one reply:

Something is fishy when commenters won’t even ALLOW FOR THE POSSIBILITY of charter schools. The NEA-AFT’s paid trolls are not only posting, but their members are clicking “like” to get a high presence for these nonsensical comments.