Web Site Comment Moderation is a Must!
A few weeks ago I took a break from most of social media, blogging, and reading most blogs. I think this is something all heavy users of the web should do from time to time. The best thing about the internet is that it puts you in touch with various opinions and a wide variety of information. But the downside of the internet is that it puts you in touch with various opinions and a wide variety of information. Sometimes it’s all too much. And as a voracious reader, I was consuming a high volume of information that was affecting me.
During my week and a half break, I mainly read the Washington Post and NY Times, the Daily Caller (don’t ask), and The Atlantic. I stayed away from all of the comment sections except for the ones at The Atlantic, in particular the blog maintained by Atlantic Senior Editor Ta-nehisi Coates. Well, actually, I strayed into the Daily Caller comment section ONCE and quickly learned my lesson.
Within about two days, I realized that The Atlantic is probably my favorite place to hang out on the web. But it’s not just because of the great writing, it’s because they do a really good job of cutting down on the filth people log online to spew and the Atlantic writers play a role in that. It makes for a greater web experience for all involved.
For that reason, I think more web sites should look at ways to implement some sort of comment moderation. I know that to some this may seem like censorship, but in going through comments on even higher brow sites like the Times, it’s amazing what people create accounts to say. I think a lot of those people probably aren’t even regular readers of the site content but log in to be mean about a particular subject. I think censorship of deliberate meanness is okay. Seems like papers are realizing how uncomfortable the lack of moderation makes some of us, CNN reports that more papers are are reigning in this atrocious behavior.
Some companies are even beginning to outsource their comment moderation and I’m seeing a growing use of Disqus which allows commenters to flag inappropriate comments and “like” substantial ones. I hope this is a sign that there is a growing desire among web users to monitor what’s said–the same way content that is uploaded is monitored on many sites. Without web content monitoring we’d be subjected to a lot of very bad images and comments. The NY Times tackled the subject of the psychological consequences for people who monitor web content. What an obscure but interesting topic!
Anyway, web owners know that without censoring some content, their web site will become a haven for unseemly people and behavior. I think this is a big part of why myspace fell off in popularity. They just didn’t do a good job separating PG-13 myspace from its XXX alter ego.
Overall, I feel more comfortable commenting on sites where there is some sort of commenter accountability. I’m not saying that every site should make visitors audition in order to comment, but comment moderation not only discourages ignorance and maliciousness, it also leaves room for the reasonable commenters to focus on elevating the discourse between each other rather than getting bogged down in the negativity others bring to a given site.
Although most small blogs tend to be comment hungry–comments are another way of proving readership–I delete any and all offensive comments. There’s simply no place for that here. I wouldn’t want anyone having to take a break from my site.
Update: Salon.com posted an article defending anonymous and vile commenting. I responded here. The crux of the writer’s point is that if we censor these people we lose touch with real America and that vile comments prove that racism still exists and that the education system fails some people. While I think that’s an interesting and entertaining point, if people need to read filth to know that these are still social issues, we’ve already lost the battle. Long before the internet existed we were able to identify and correct social ills. Fancy that.
Update: One last point about comments. Many bloggers try to appeal to EVERYONE, a general audience. That’s not my goal on this blog. I am looking for a SPECIFIC type of reader. In order to reach that type of reader I take lots of measures: 1. I focus my posts 2. I monitor the length of posts 3. I try to insert discussion points into my posts as much as possible, and 4. I moderate the comments. Comment moderation is not a stand alone strategy.
Posted in Across the Web, Featured, Social Media @ 11:53pm 
censorship, Comment moderation, web content monitoring
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by J Danielle , J Danielle . J Danielle said: Bloggers and big publications have this in common: All need comment moderation! http://ow.ly/2kE2n [...]
Another great post!
I think we’ll see a rise in comment moderation and companies that offer the service in the future. I can see the day coming when people begin to use comments left by site visitors as the basis for lawsuits. I don’t think much of that is happening now…but wait.
Also, as I’m sure you know, the quality of the site usually determines the quality of the comments. If the content skews toward the negative, so do the comments. Although I think mainstream pubs like the NYT attract comments from all kinds regardless of the subject.
Yes, yes and yes.
I avoid most comment sections that are over 80 comments. That’s usually a good sign it’s only foolishness and comment sections on newspaper/media outlets are super no nos. They’re always on some b.s.
Everybody shouldn’t be able to say just anything. The reckless and ignorant comments hinder good discourse.
I agree with both of you. @chyna I’m definitely hoping to keep my site on the good quality side. I don’t want to attract a crazy crowd.
@Asmith And how sad is it that a lot of comments indicates a lot of problems. lol Although I must say on The Atlantic site, comments are typically in access of 200 and sometimes the comments get bogged down responding to weirdos but overall it works.
“The best thing about the internet is that it puts you in touch with various opinions and a wide variety of information. But the downside of the internet is that it puts you in touch with various opinions and a wide variety of information. Sometimes it’s all too much.”
I totally agree. Today before visiting your site, I went to one site, followed by another, and another. I kept clicking on links within those sites to visit articles written on those sites and within those very articles were cited articles I clicked on that were on other sites. I really have to pull myself away from the computer or I could be reading for hours.
Its too much sometimes and although I enjoy reading well-written, well-researched commentary by editors/bloggers, the bombardment of stupid opinions, ignorance, and overall abandoning of some comment boxes/pages has led some of my favorite sites into decrepit-ness. Having someone pine through the idiocy and ugliness that some commenters spew is definitely a good thing.
*PS. As a part-part-time blogger of a heavy frequented pop-culture site, I tend not to go into the comment boxes of articles that I’ve personally written. Although I know I shouldn’t take people’s opinions about wayward celebrities seriously, I do see comments time-to-time that either A. Misinterpret my words or B. Comments that link to other articles that have nothing to do with the topic at hand. Its irritating
I’m more likely to get upset when people comment without reading. One thing I pride myself on is taking a less traveled angle when I blog. So when people come to the blog and comment based off the headline alone I’m tempted to delete. LOL But I don’t. The whole point of reading a blog is to reconsider your opinion…well that’s my view anyway. But on the pop cultures sites…yeah…I can see why you wouldn’t want to read. The demographics are so wide on that, and also they tend to trend younger so you never know what the under 21 crowd is going to say. The over 25 crowd is bad enough.
There’s so much content out there…I’ve gotten to the point where I have probably two sites that I go to for each sort of topic. And the comment section is one of the determining factors.
I learned quick, fast and in a hurry that comment moderation is vital. The primary topic of my website, coupled with the fact that I spend a portion of my time debunking a lot of the beliefs that affect our nation’s ability to be healthy AND the products that make people lots of money? If I didn’t strongly moderate the comments sections of the site, it would quickly descend into an environment where women would fear contributing and sharing and feeling comfortable overall with knowing that I wasn’t, essentially, protecting them.
Sure, it’s censorship, but damn all that – that’s MY space that I pay for and if I am hosting the conversation, I feel responsible for making sure that it doesn’t become foolishness and degrade the quality of my site. Considering the stuff that usually doesn’t make the cut – blatant advertisements, disrespect of the writer (I get called a fat b— at least twice a week), insults – I think that the loyal commenters appreciate the effort.
Erika, are you serious??? Your blog is SO MOTIVATING and professional! See, that’s the thing. We know there are ignorant people out there, why do they deserve a platform? I’m working on a post about that very subject…not everyone deserves to be heard!
[...] please, as long as you are in my comment section, conduct yourself with some dignity. If I can do it, I KNOW you can. var a2a_config = a2a_config || {}; a2a_config.linkname="J [...]
I believe in comment moderation for vulgar, offensive and derogatory comments but I don’t believe in removing comments for any other reason.(Oh, and for people that don’t use capitalize and type like tis becuz da gubment sayz o.) I think, for the most part, blogging is oft-times colorful commentary that can be perceived as negative, which leaves me a little surprised if I learn a blogger is sensitive when it comes to their commentors. You make good points for why you would remove a post but what is “deliberate meanness?” What are some comments you have removed?
I have been a fan of comment moderation since AOL 1.0, and I I know it’s only a matter of time before news sites realize that it’s necessary for a good user experience. However, I think there must be rules so that readers know what exactly would be removed. I don’t want to read Websites were everyone all happily agrees and does the achy break heart together.
I haven’t had to remove comments from this blog yet but on my other blog I had to remove a few personal attacks. I’m not too sensitive about things, in fact, I enjoy some forms of ignorance, but when it ‘s personal or crude, this just isn’t the place. It’s not about disagreeing, disagreement is great, but it must be respectful (here).
For example, on a lot of political sites, there are extreme racist comments made. That’s not in the interest of debate.