That’s what New York Times digital chief Martin Nisenholtz seemed to suggest during his afternoon keynote at OMMA Global today. Recalling the Times’ initial foray into social media
â€" “little ghettos†known as forums â€" he said it fundamentally divided into two camps of discussions: Those that were good, high-quality comments and conversations in which
the users were generally not anonymous, and “the other side,†which was “just horrible†discussions about the Middle East, abortions, and other controversial discussions
posted by users who generally were anonymous.
“The best ones are the ones that are not anonymous. The worst ones are the ones that are anonymous,†Nisenholtz noted.