US newspaper takes stand against 'comment trolls'

Source: afp

Amid a growing debate among US newspaper editors over the practice of allowing anonymous comments, one New York publication is taking a stand.

The Buffalo News announced on Monday that it will begin requiring identification from people who want to leave comments on its website, BuffaloNews.com.

"We will require commenters to give their real names and the names of their towns, which will appear with their comments, just as they do in printed 'letters to the editor,'" Buffalo News editor Margaret Sullivan said.

Websites have employed a variety of methods to deal with "trolling" -- from banning comments altogether to deploying filtering software which screens out posts containing profanity.

Read more: http://www.france24.com/en/20100622-us-newspaper-takes-stand-against-comment-trolls

---

seems like this is a widely-debated theme these days, on DU also.

on editing, this is the article by margaret sullivan, in the buffalo news:

Margaret Sullivan: Seeking a return to civility in online comments
Some editors were sitting in a news meeting one morning not long ago, bemoaning the often outrageous, intolerant and hateful online “comments” attached to stories on The News Web site, when News Business Editor Grove Potter uttered a simple but eloquent truth:
“Let’s face it,” he said. “We’ve created a class of anonymous flamethrowers.”
He’s right. We have. And shortly, we’re about to change that dramatically.
Online commenting began, a year or so ago, as a way to engage our Web readers and give them a chance to air their points of view and get some discussion going on the topics of the day.

on the BN, http://www.buffalonews.com/2010/06/20/1088283/seeking-a-return-to-civility-in.html

...that for some it might be just dangerous to expose themselves, due to very strong opinions.
there are many ways to smash someone with a silencer, so to say - so i understand anonymity.
but in general, i would not mind.

i can handle with a nuts neighbor ;)

There are certain views I hold that some people would find extremely offensive.

...a big company or the military or in public office, i don't know what else, and having to express strong confronting opinions in their own field, for example.

in comments to my paper - not that my views are so outrageous, but because of what I do for a living - too many people I don't really want to piss off.

At the same time, the folks hiding behind anonymous comments on the same paper are rarely people with opinions worth reading. Most are quite troll-like, indeed.

That should weed out some of the chronic troublemakers.

My local paper took down the Forums feature altogether, because a few clowns thought they owned the place.

are particularly bad, real yahoos in fact.

The screamers are easy.

last summer, even though they could easily be identified.

with level of anonymity.... But, I'd argue that that is most pronounced among those who have a fairly authoritarian mindset to begin with.

I didn't see it in the article. I mean are they going to request contact information in order to register? If so are they willing to hire a person to actually call to verify a person is who they say they are?

I don't know, it just doesn't seem feasible to me.

"After quite a bit of internal discussion, The News — in the next few weeks — will make a significant change. We will require commenters to give their real names and the names of their towns, which will appear with their comments, just as they do in printed “letters to the editor,” which have appeared daily for many years on the newspaper’s op-ed page.

It will mean that Web site readers must fill out an online form and include a phone number that we will use to help verify that they are who they say they are. It won’t be foolproof, and it will be somewhat labor-intensive for us, but we think it will raise the level of the discussion.

“We hope to raise the level of discourse by providing a measure of accountability,” said News Online Editor Brian Connolly."

(my bold)

http://www.buffalonews.com/2010/06/20/1088283/seeking-a-return-to-civility-in.html

how are you going to verify their ID?

I don't dispute the need for a return to civility, but I just don't understand how they are going to make this work.

...that they are who they say they are"
http://www.buffalonews.com/2010/06/20/1088283/seeking-a-return-to-civility-in.html

i think they are going to lose some commenters along the road ;)

a call first, verifying your information.

Now, of course, someone could use a fake name, and give their real phone number, but that also leaves the deception fairly open to discovery, doesn't it?

you could use their name and a $15 throwaway phone that you registered in their name.
It seems like a lot of bother to go to, but people get fired over stuff like this all the time.

:rofl:

newbie dreams :rofl: :rofl:

If you had to have your name next to your comment you're going to be quiet and not let people like your boss be able to go read your real opinions on things.

I'm all AGAINST this. What a way to shut people up.

No one has to have the courage of their convictions in this country anymore; just find a pack/gang and hang tight.

Message board anonymity is a different issue. For me, the critical factor is the degree to which the non-obsessed public reads the content.

As there was never noticeable amount of violence vis-a-vis written (and verified) letters to the editor when the local papers were 90% of our news reading content, I can't see this as being any different-- either in degrees, content or form.

I imagine if we don't have the conviction to put our own names to our own thoughts, those thoughts probably aren't really worth the paper they won't be printed on...

with one of the founders of our local online news"paper" (The Branford Eagle) about the low level of discourse in the New Haven Register and Hartford Courant online version comment sections. Most of what is posted on the Register's site is pure drivel and includes thinly veiled racism. Unlike the online-only newspsper, they don't moderate their comments at all. I've alerted on several of the racist ones and I don't think anything happened. There's nothing to prevent the idiot from using another user name and continuing to post that dreck.

As to having to use one's full name - I have mixed feelings on that. I don't mind providing it to the newspaper, just as I do when I mail a letter to the editor. When they are published, I may get some comments from people who know me, but that's as far as it goes. Online, the pack mentality can set in and you can be attacked and there is no referee. Plus, in a small town they can find you and physically confront you. I wouldn't mind first name and town being published. If all comments were moderated, I might feel differently about it but I'm not sure.