Editor's View
David Olson
October 17, 2008 10:49 am When The Salem News began allowing comments on online stories, we hoped to create an online community where readers could talk about what they read in the paper and other issues they found important. We were hoping for a lively back and forth — the Web equivalent of the debates between regulars at the corner coffee shop. The response has been fantastic. We've had more than 25,000 comments since April, when we first began allowing them on salemnews.com stories, editorials and columns. The discussion and debate on some issues — Question 1, the ballot initiative to eliminate the state income tax, for example — has carried on days after the original story ran. We think that's a good thing. But there have been growing pains. Two issues — the content of the comments and the abuse of anonymity by many of the commenters themselves — seem to be causing most of the problems. Let's talk content first. There's nothing wrong with lively debate and sharp disagreement. There is something wrong with profanity, name-calling and racism. We've removed several posts with those elements in recent days, and have shut down a few threads that had devolved into a flame war between two users. It seems to be a good time to review our rules for Internet comment. We reserve the right to remove comments that: Make false statements about a person, business or institution; Reference the personal health, sexual activity, religious beliefs or other private matters involving a story subject or commenter, or someone related to a story subject or commenter; Are racist in nature; Threaten a story commenter or suggest violence; Accuse someone of criminal activity; Make crude statements about a child or children; or Include swearing or obscenity. This includes obscene screen names and the use of symbols — $%&@#* — to get around language filters. We will allow: Opinions some people will find offensive; Conversation that is simply strident in tone; Criticism of public officials; and Criticism of people who are subjects of stories. Readers can also "flag" any comment they think is inappropriate, and it will be reviewed by an editor. On to anonymity. Most of the toxic comments we have received have come from people using a pseudonym. A few times, people have posted using the name of a public official or someone else in the news. Others use several aliases, sometimes conducting an online conversation with themselves. Some folks have used as many as 40 aliases. That's absurd. Moving forward, we have two options: Discontinue anonymous comments and force anyone commenting to use their real name; or Allow anonymous comments but require posters to register or verify their accounts. Users who register their accounts, claiming a single user name with a valid e-mail address, would be able to post directly to our site. They would still be able to shield their name with a pseudonym. They would keep that user name for all their posts. Unregistered commenters would have their posts go to a holding queue. Those comments wouldn't go live on the site until they are approved by a Salem News moderator. That might happen only a few times a day. This would likely cut down on the number of folks using dozens of names as well as the hit-and-run posts of those looking only to offend others. Before we make a final decision, we want to hear from you. Let us know what you think. You can use the comment field below, or send an e-mail to dolson@salemnews.com ¬¢¬¢¬¢ David Olson is the editor of The Salem News.
—
Copyright © 1999-2008 cnhi, inc.