The internet is the biggest, most diverse, most deep, most annoyingly beautiful space we’ve created so far: lives are entirely made here. It’s not different to the “real world”, it’s part of it. To portray it as some disconnected space helps no one; indeed it only provides ammo to those who would see it as a mere playground for their sadistic taunting.
Just as we shape our social lives in physical space, we can shape our digital space. We block, remove, shut down as we want to create spaces we prefer – indeed, we even create our own tools when the providers themselves do not.One area we can manage – but seem not to – are comment sections of social media account timelines.
Comments are often regarded as a right but they can do more harm than good. In the absence of strict moderation, we’d be much better off without them.
It sits there like an ugly growth beneath articles, bloated and throbbing with vitriol. It groans as hatred expands its force, waiting for any point of dissent to break it – to unleash its full fury on targets who dare convey some measure of civility or dissent …
Comment sections, to me, are the chronic pain centers of the internet, the part of the digital body we’re all forced to accept exists, but must manage by injecting policies and systems into.
How does a an admin who has created a group for a specific purpose determine when comment is in violation?
Many people, including myself, won’t read a comment section if it is not moderated – often not reading an entire site, even the articles. As The Atlantic’s Adam Felder notes: “unmoderated comments appear to have a small, but real deleterious effect on readers’ perception of the sites or timeline on which they appear.”
Let’s face it, social media timelines and comment platforms can sometimes become magnets for inappropriate or off-topic comments that distract from the important information being shared. The ability to hide or remove or moderate comments on social media seems to be an option for group or page admin, but it should not be overlooked that creators of the very website where your group is created has already thought of all the challenging and critical issue surrounding comment hence,they give admins the option to moderate comments.
This is one powerful tool or plugin that enables the admin to keep his or her group within the circle of what ever aims and objectives on which the said group was created.
There are countless groups and pages on social media platforms.Some need no comment moderation based on the aims and objectives of the group.In some groups on social media like Facebook,anything can be posted,right from nude to insults and group member will dance to every drum beat that hits the timeline…
The endless anonymity favor of online profile has become one daring tool subscribers use to say all level of things when they clash with another in commenting
Other groups will not allow this.Post one nude pic or a single inappropriate post or even the slightest opposition to the admin’s decision at any given time ,and you are kick out in the next click second.Group Admins of such group or pages think a member has not right to appose any decision made by the admin…and this has always be labelled as one best practice because it kind of filter group members to the very quality the admin wants because ‘oppositions’ quit from the group or are completely banned.It is said that no landlord will rent his or her room to any tenant who doesn’t agree to any rules on the compound..
Sometimes,one might think this is too harsh and will eventually expel majority of the group members but the fact of the matter is that,it depends on the quality of members the admin targeted when creating the group.So when members realized that members are being blocked for inappropriate posts,the ‘die hard radicals’ in the group oppose the harsh ‘blockage ‘ and the ‘radical’ will just exist the group on their own….perhaps to go find a better group that can entertain their kind of mentality on social media.
A lot of times when people express their hatred for people’s behaviour online,“That’s just the internet. Learn to deal with it.”
This assertion gives no humanity to victims: everyone is a blank, emotionless internet user, with no history of being targeted for her sex, race, or sexuality. As much as we should be treated equally, in reality, we come from backgrounds where we’re not – and we continue not to be treated fairly. Second, in this assertion, the internet, too, becomes an amoral wasteland where only the “fittest” survive – and by “fittest” we usually mean individuals who rarely face prejudice or hostility premised on their type of comment they post depending on the context of subject being discussed.
People remain people, whether behind keyboards or at your dinner table. That means we can and do take action and decide what kind of spaces we want to create: it’s for this reason, comment systems have blocking tools, social media sites have restrictions!…this is very important.This, too, dear wizards, is also the internet! Namely: cutting off the tongues of opposing commenters..This is sometimes important and necessary as it poses a threat to the vision of the group or page.
One of the many pieces of “advice” we get regarding comment sections (and other areas) is “don’t feed the trolls”. Dr Whitney Philips, a communication lecturer at Humboldt State University and who is releasing a book on trolls, writes in The Daily Dot:
‘Don’t feed the trolls’ frames conversations about aggressive online behaviours solely in terms of the aggressor. Even if a person avoids feeding the trolls (and/or the person accused of trolling), he or she is still playing into the aggressor’s hands
Adam Lee, who runs popular atheist blog Daylight Atheism (which means it’s never controversial right?), welcomes comments but thinks it’s a digital suicide to not moderate. Unmoderated comments will never work. There are too many cranks, crackpots, bigots and nasty people with nothing but time on their hands. And no intelligent, thoughtful person will take the time to jump into a comment thread that’s a cesspool (and who could blame them?), so bad comments inevitably drive out good ones.
We know anonymity has less of an effect than we might think toward encouraging abusive behaviour: these people are “trolls” in real life, too.
The major thing isn’t anonymity so much as it is non-accountability: there is no tangible, negative consequence for treating someone awfully.
Though that’s slowly changing, with people being convicted for internet behaviour – because more of us, and the more powerful of us, are realising internet behaviour is still behaviour and it has an effect on targeted people.
Comment sections as a gift, not a right –
Many people often feel slighted at comment moderation when their opinions are removed. Yet, people who complain about having their comments moderated or removed seem to be the kind of people you don’t want commenting in the first place.
Because comment sections exist, people believe it’s a free soapbox on which all opinions – even awful ones – are given voice and space (I’m sure some will joke about Comment is Free here). Sites need only adhere to (mostly) their own rules and policies: they can set whatever parameters they want. You, as a reader or group member, do not.
It seems to be a terribly entitled perspective: your opinion is so golden delicious a website will fall and collapse if it does not publish it. This is not only a high-minded opinion of yourself but also negates the entire 99.999999% of the internet that really does allow free rein to voice bizarre and bigoted views. (If the site really needed your opinion to survive, I assume they’d be paying you to write atop the line.)
Sites often seem hesitant about banning or shutting off comment sections, having to step forward hat-in-hand to their readers to explain why (when they turn off comments on often highly sensitive articles).
That to me is the wrong approach: comment sections shouldn’t be the rule, but they should be a carefully managed gift to readers on an article-by-article basis. That means readers should be thankful they’re allowed to comment directly on the site – not feel infringed when it’s not there.
Indeed, as Columbia Journalism Review’s Dorian Rolston notes, comments themselves colour perceptions of the article (though I know many contest the studies this is based on); meaning writers can work hard on research, clarity and still be left up to the mercy of commenters clouding perceptions. This helps no one except the worst offenders.
We must remember, though, that it does take time and effort to moderate. As Derek Mead, editor-in-chief of Vice’s Motherboard tells me: “In practice, it takes a huge amount of time to keep up with comments sections, and defining the line of a bad post or a good one is difficult; it saves a lot of time and frustration just dealing with the worst.” Thus, even when moderating does occur, as we note with Mead and the ex-Mail Online moderator, awful comments will still exist. (I am reminded by the ex-Mail Online moderator that if we think the comments we see are awful, think about the ones moderators have removed.)…
This a typical example our CEO experienced on Facebook.
Our Facebook account DELA YAYRA RADIO TV DELA is a group member of Ewe Community Forum – on Facedbook
This account is used by 8 members of our news room.On the day of the incident,Christmas day,the 25th Dec 2017,our CEO himself was using the account to review our activities on Facebook for the year and he happens to have gotten himself in a feud in this forum.
Narrating the incident to the news department of YAYRA RADIO TV,it started when the admin of the group ALEX KPODONU post the the below image on his timeline
This decision according to our investigation into the comments that followed went down very well with majority of the ‘forum’s’ members except few – about less than 4 members,compared to over 80,000 group memebers.This of course carried the less vote and the comment counts.
Our CEO ‘reacted’ to one commenter with face book ID (Cudjoe Frank) – His ‘reaction’ then ignited some attention ,evolveing into an intense argument on the timeline. Another facebook id (Selorm Peter ) who initially was kind of supporting our CEO also suddenly made a sudden u-turn to far as labeling our CEO as a fake journalist..as Cudjoe Frank also posted earlier.
(Cudjoe Frank) called our CEO a fake journalist,a fraud and an attention whore,something we find iliterally primitive and unfortunate because this is an id of a media house and any reasonably educated fellow will not do this,after his so call visit to our Facebook home page,unless he deliberately decided to throw such word due to the way our CEO stood against him for opposing the admin’s decision to introduce moderation…even that alone is aggressively radical..The argument went on and on and on until (Selorm Peter ) posted a comment advising (Cudjoe Frank) to end the arguments.
Below are screen shots before we pass our conclusion on this matter.
YAYRA RADIO TV dares – that administrator Alex Kpodonu ,in his own particular astuteness ,as creator of the group to present what ever control and measure .This is the fundamental right and energy of an administrator and until an administrator practice this power he or she isn’t fit to be an administrator.
We can’t think far that a gathering part could come up that statement web-based social networking is the cure for confinements and restriction… quote ‘ Social media is the cure for restrictions and censorship ‘ unquote – we dont know precisely whats the first opposing Facebook user implied by this yet we see ‘crude’ in this extremely current time when designers of online networking site are battling with the level at which remarks or comments platforms are getting to be poisonous…This plainly demonstrate how immature and imprudent some Facebook clients can be at all levels just to safeguard their numbness on current issues.
YAYRA RADIO TV first of all congratulate Alex Kpodonu for creating a powerful group such as Ewe Community Forum –
We further encourage him to take charge and be in charge less members who had no idea why he created the group will end up pushing him ‘offline’ and flood the group with the ‘die hard’ kind of educatively deranged members.We support his moderation idea 100%…..
Many people, including myself, won’t read a comment section if it is not moderated – often not reading an entire site, even the articles. As The Atlantic’s Adam Felder notes: “unmoderated comments appear to have a small, but real deleterious effect on readers’ perception of the sites on which they appear.”
Finally YAYRA RADIO TV officially apologize to the admin of the group Alex Kpodonu and all other commenters who viewed the tussle on the timeline silently – an unfortunate incident between our CEO and the said commentors. We deeply regret the incident…Though we still hold on and support comments moderation in the group.We think its the best for the group.Thank you for reading.