All in moderation

Matt Rourke/ASSOCIATED PRESS

Matt Rourke/ASSOCIATED PRESS

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie has been in more than a little hot water lately, with “Bridgegate” taking on a life of its own after aides reportedly arranged traffic jams on the George Washington Bridge as political payback against a Democratic mayor.

But even with the ensuing resignations and allegations emerging about Hurricane Sandy funds, this scandal might seem somewhat minor in the context of political history. However, it’s just the sort of bullying attitude that Christie’s administration is accused of that has infected our discourse in this country for decades.

df

Image from Ken Foundation Society.

A couple of weeks ago in this space, I lamented the lack of civility on comment boards and elsewhere. Not all Internet sites have this problem, but on some, a thrown-off remark can be blood in the water for hyperpartisan commenters who just love to start fights (but unlike Pink, they’re not rock stars in any sense of the word).

Sometimes the ensuing chaos was the intention of an Internet troll, someone who deliberately makes provocative remarks in hopes of creating a feeding frenzy (and sometimes is paid to do so). Boards on sites like Democratic Underground and Free Republic thrive on this discord, and those from the opposing party who dare post, and who surely know the leanings of those sites, are generally swiftly met with a smackdown.

Image from ComicVine.

Image from ComicVine.

On general news sites such as the Washington Post, though, the vitriol in comments can often be shocking, ranging from profanity and insulting language—often to or about fellow commenters—to accusations of illegality. What might have begun as spirited debate can rapidly devolve.

It sometimes can resemble a car crash in that we know we shouldn’t keep reading such comments but just can’t look away, and before you know it, half a day is wasted.

timeflies

There’s another side-effect of all the vitriol: It tends to drive away people who believe in reasonable discussion, which in turn results in studies that claim the conspiracy theorists and bullies on the sites are now spouting the conventional wisdom. And that leads to interpretations that those people are thus saner than everyone else.

Seriously, I'm getting close to having only this much hair again.

Seriously, I’m getting close to having only this much hair again.

Which leads to me pulling my hair out again. And bald is not a good look for me.

Some news sites take a hands-on approach to policing their comments sections. The New York Times, for instance, pre-moderates all comments; comments are screened for profanity and other flagged words, personal attacks., etc., before being posted. The paper opens comments for only a limited number of stories each day, though, so that makes the approach do-able.

The Times noted in a 2012 blog post: “The rewards of this approach are in the quality of our discussions, in which we take great pride, not least because we feel we offer a safe space where people of all political persuasions can make their case without fear of a barrage of childish insults or insubstantial or off-color remarks.”

flamageBecause of their methods, it can take a while for some comments to appear, the paper says, but “the trade-off is more than worth it, although we know some readers disagree. We see these comments as an extension of our journalism. We value the input of a majority of our commenters and are not willing to have their words devalued by running them alongside personal attacks, innuendo and obscenity.”

The Deseret News in Salt Lake City, Utah, took a similar approach by deciding to pre-approve reader comments, and recently hosted a relatively civil discussion in the comments for a front-page story on same-sex marriage.

Image from PC Pro.

Image from PC Pro.

My own paper, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, does not pre-screen comments unless they are from flagged users; otherwise, comments go up immediately. However, comments reported by other users as offensive are reviewed and taken down if they violate the site’s terms-of-use policy.

The Post’s moderation is similar, and allows both anonymous and Facebook commenting, but comment threads still often turn hostile quickly.

Image from Roll Call.

Image from Roll Call story on Michele Bachmann retirement .

Other news sites have turned to requiring commenters to use Disqus or Facebook to comment, meaning they are supposed to use their real name. The theory is that eschewing anonymity will defuse the possibility of a free-for-all in the comments, but the jury is still out on how successful that’s been. While it seems to have spawned at least a little more civility in some comment sections, others are just as hostile as before.

Some sites, such as Popular Science, have just given up and decided to ban comments altogether. Online editor Suzanne LaBarre explained in a blog post that the comments were bad for science and that because “comments sections tend to be a grotesque reflection of the media culture surrounding them, the cynical work of undermining bedrock scientific doctrine is now being done beneath our own stories.”

Image from Roll Call.

Image from Roll Call story on Michele Bachmann retirement.

Back in 2010, Scott Rosenberg of Wordyard wrote that anonymity isn’t really the problem with newspaper comments: “Show me a newspaper website without a comments host or moderation plan and I’ll show you a nasty flamepit that no unenforceable ‘use your real name’ policy can save. Telling Web users ‘Use your real name’ isn’t bad in itself, but it won’t get you very far if your site has already degenerated into nasty mayhem.”

Image from mobile-cuisine.com.

Image from mobile-cuisine.com.

What it comes down to, though, is bullying, whether online or in print, and it is up to us to stand up to such rude behavior. Don’t give them what they want, which is chaos; feeding the trolls just encourages them. Instead of assuming a defensive posture, answer accusations with facts, turn their claims back onto them or simply ignore them.

If we don’t allow bullies to gain more ground, reason can win again.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “All in moderation

  1. I just very recently noticed a reference to your blog in one of your editorials in the newspaper. I especially enjoyed and appreciate your two recent posts regarding civility or to be more specific, the lack of it that is experienced within most media outlets comment sections. Reminiscent of your blog title itself, I find it most difficult to get very far into an active comments section without having to prevail upon the infamous Frank Costanza edict of “Serenity now!” Discussions within the limits of civility can not only provide learning experiences on occasion, but in many cases exposing our own biases and misunderstandings.

    Like

    • Thank you so much, Alan! That is very true, indeed … and a little spooky, too … Steph and I tend to frequently invoke Frank Costanza! ;-). As great as technology is, it’s one more thing that enables the kind of rude behavior that gets on my last nerve, then uses it as a jumprope (as well as a grammatical nightmare for any editor). I just have to hope that eventually we can prevail over the bullies before they encroach any more than they already have into everyday life.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s