I was just reading an article on the Guardian about criticism over America’s aid for the disaster response efforts in Puerto Rico, and I made a somewhat rookie error in continuing after the end of the article to scroll towards the comments.
Comments are sometimes a guilty pleasure of sorts that many of us indulge in – sitting back and observing a fiery exchange between two equally opinionated users is often akin to reading a particularly tense section of a gripping novel.
I’m certainly no exception, but lately I’ve been reflecting with rising concern on the aims of those that make particularly inflammatory or personal comments in the name of defending a cause or ideal. For example, in this thread, a user made a comment about the perceived sensationalism of Puerto Rico’s leadership in appealing for aid, and expressed his disapproval of the Guardian’s approach.
It was a heartless comment at best that provided no evidence for the angle taken, but it wasn’t difficult to see how it could have been addressed and quickly discredited by a single responsible retort. Instead, I counted four comments in response to it that were removed for breaching the Guardian’s appropriate conduct policy. Obviously, what these comments said that led to their removal is unknown, but I found a fifth comment which, if we take it as an example of a comment that is considered appropriate by the Guardian’s moderators, leaves an alarming impression of what these deleted comments may have contained.
Of course, the actual comments are irrelevant. What I find most surprising is that given the average level of eloquence for some of these aggressive responses I’ve found – which on the whole demonstrate a decent level of literary skill – they are so often far too aggressively posited to render any of the actual substance effective.
I question how anyone could believe that an angry polemical outburst targeting not so much the comment as the user that posted the comment would be in the least bit useful in persuading this user of their own misconceptions. If one truly wanted to show another the error of their ways, coming up with creative ways to dramatically and savagely insult them is not the way to go about it.
If anything, all you achieve is a strengthening of their belief that you and people like you are all they believe you to be and worse. You lend credence to their spite, and in so doing encourage them to double down on their original comments. This in turn would further infuriate others, making it more difficult to have a reasoned discussion, and before you know it, divisiveness reigns.
Next time you have an opportunity and inclination to post a comment aimed at someone else, do both parties a favour and think about what you’re actually saying. Are you providing cheap entertainment for bored onlookers? Or are you actually going to post something that might give someone else reasonable pause? It’s your move.
TJDempsey 