Commentary
On Incivility
- by Erik Sass , Staff Writer @eriksass1, April 13, 2010
You know you must be getting old when you're bothered by incivility in online forums. But it does bother me, damn it, and not just out of some reflexive dislike of confrontation. I'm worried it reflects something fundamentally wrong with modern society, or at least some of the individuals who compose it. And I'm also wondering whether individuals who are uncivil online may be doing themselves professional damage they're not even aware of.
I was inspired to write this by a survey of comments left by visitors to a number of Web sites, including this one. To be clear, I have no problem at all with negative, critical comments (of which I have received my share): they let you know there are other viewpoints out there, and sometimes they can be quite informative. Journalists can be mistaken or misinformed; meanwhile opinion pieces are pretty much begging for contrarian comment. All's fair in blogs and war, and anyone who writes something to post it online better have pretty thick skin.
That said, I've been amazed and appalled by the things people are willing to say online. And I'm not talking about some 13-year-old boy posting "Justin Bieber is gay" on some teen chat site -- these are comments ostensibly left by adult professionals, with their name signed to them and everything.
Recently, one of my colleagues here at MediaPost, Laurie Sullivan, wrote a post about finding the U.S. Census questions intrusive, noting the irony that for some reason she doesn't mind the idea of behavioral targeting gathering more personal information. This elicited several dozen responses -- most of which were civil enough -- presenting counterpoints to the effect that it's really not that intrusive, we should fill it out so the government can provide services, the data is useful for marketing, it's in the Constitution, etc.
However, two people also came up with the oh-so-original suggestion (paraphrasing) that "if you don't like America, you should leave." Shocked, I scrolled back up to the original blog post and re-read it, looking for the part where she said she doesn't like America: nada. In fact, there's nothing even vaguely critical about America or the U.S. government, just some of the Census questions.
Several people called her a "moron" and one told her to "pull her head out of her ***." All I will say here is, a quick piece of advice: If you're going to call someone you don't even know a "moron" in a public forum ... use spell-check. Moving on.
One comment (which left me wondering if it was even on the right Web site) accused her of being a racist fear-monger. Huh? Parsing this misspelled, ungrammatical and potentially libelous comment, the argument seems to be this: Laurie has a problem with the Census. The Census is distributed by the Federal government. The Federal government is headed by Barack Obama. Barack Obama is African-American. Ergo, Laurie has a problem with Barack Obama because he is African-American. The only issue I have with this analysis is that after "Laurie has a problem with the Census," none of the statements are supported by what she wrote in the article -- no mention of Barack Obama or anything relating to him (not that it matters, but I'd give pretty good odds she voted for Obama).
This comment, like the comments suggesting she leave America if she doesn't like it, touch on the deeper, underlying dysfunctions I mentioned at the outset. Basically, in addition to being hateful these comments make it clear that the person leaving the comment is reacting more to a pre-conceived image of a thing than the actual thing itself. All these "extra details" are provided by their imagination: clearly, if she has a problem with the Census, she is a shotgun-toting America-hating libertarian racist freak. Recently I wrote a post where I mentioned that I was trying to get excused from jury duty; without caring to inquire about my reasons, one person left a comment informing me that "you are part of the problem with this country."
Basically, these people have constructed their own private echo chamber, and it seems clear from the volume of such comments all over the Web that the Internet -- for all its supposed "interactivity" -- is just an exercise in solipsistic psychological venting for people who are, for some reason, just angry all the time. The easy, almost random hostility of comments on the Web strikes me as evidence of widespread, ambient feelings of frustration and dissatisfaction which simply have no other outlet in contemporary American society.
Or maybe I'm just a moron? I guess I should start packing my bags for Cuba.
Erik Sass is editor of Publishers Daily. You can reach Erik at eriksass@gmail.com.
An insightful moron perhaps but who am I to judge. It's true though and we work everyday in the conversation trying to filter out the noise - from those wanting to argue for arguments sake or notch something very disturbing (self aware or not)- it inevitably goes off-topic and makes the experience unpleasant, unproductive or worse. I share the frustration and it's not so much a sign of age and more a sign of the times. Enjoy Cuba!
Want to see a really big bucket of crazy? Read the comments that follow most stories in The Daily Beast or most videos on YouTube. You'll start to wonder where is this thing called reason with which humans are supposed to have been endowed. Incivility is bad enough, but what I find disturbing is how many people miss the point of what they're reading. Think millions of Rosanne Rosannadannas with computers. It ain't pretty.
Very apt, very well articulated. Thanks.
I agree with you, though from the snippet in my email, I thought this was going to be more insightful. However, this might be due to my experience in forums and discussions, so I've grown accustomed to the uncivil behavior that your post is about.
What kind of stupi... OK, just kidding. Good comments, and worth noting, actually, that incivility seems to be the rule of the day, and it's not just bottom up. Or do you recall Senators yelling Liar! at all of our Presidents at the State of the Union address. The web is like the 1st Amendment: we may not like what we hear, but it's also good to know what's out there - even if it makes you worry about the species. For some people the anonymity of the web seems to pluck up their courage to say things I strongly doubt they'd say face to face. Which would be a good rule, if the web wasn't so unruly: don't write something you wouldn't say face to face in a room with others listening. Then again, given some of the infantile shouting matches that took place at town hall meetings, maybe that wouldn't work so well, either.
Incivility is like a plague. When one group starts, then it spreads like an infection. We can go through the whole package of the incivility and pure hatred towards the President and those who support him, a increased recent increased expression of hatred towards undocumented immigrants, those who are homosexual, and towards those who seem to lean a bit to the left of politics by the other side who have been the majority of those projecting extreme prejudice, racist and violent reactions..but that is no excuse for any person to be called a racist if they disagree with the President or our current government.
We can disagree and even have enthusiastic discussions about issues, but we have to be mindful that this is a very diverse nation..and it will keep becoming diverse in race, ethnicity, and lifestyle. If we can't speak to each other and accept this diversity, like the intolerance we have seen in the tea party movement, then many of us will be (and some are already) left behind in this 21st century.
In this century it is "required" of us to accept changes...that is the nature of our global society, which will and have had a major impact on the U.S. What we see here with quite a few of our citizens is a stark fear of changing demographics and what is means to be an "American"..and the new identity of American culture(s). Being American does not mean the same thing it meant in the 1950's...and our world is becoming so diverse. The 20th century mindset and its way of doing things are simply not valid anymore..and this major shift in our culture is scaring the mess out of people..and and when they attack then some others will retaliate and it gets very messy.
Now with the Census, I do agree with some of the comments that you spoke of about it helping the government to do a better job in governing. It allows us to see how we have grown in diversity. It may be intrusive to some, but as for me, it is an honor to be "counted" as a minority (Female and African American). I am disappointed that someone would call your colleague a racist...we need to use our intelligence when discussing these issues. The Census does help us as minorities to be counted...those minorities who have faced a serious uptick in racism since Obama got in (racism against blacks, immigrants, and because some think he is a Muslim...a reprise of racist feelings towards Muslims). So, we have to be very mindful as intelligent adults about the current state of our nation and the high sensitivities that this hatred has sparked recently.
Hey... leave Cuba out of it! :) Just kidding.
Thanks for your reasoned comments, Erik. The racism accusation was particularly uncalled for and uninformed. Americans have been complaining about the census since the very first one.
Yikes... don't tell us that Andrew Keen may have been right after all (even partially). While I actually railed against "The Cult of the Amateur" myself in print (though at least civilly if not articulately), maybe like many points of view that run contrary to our own, there was something to be learned after all.
I believe it was John Stuart Mill who said "Any silencing of discussion is an assumption of infallibility".
Love the CUBA poster - thought the article was somehow related. After reading it though, I realized the connection it has with the Census since "Cuban" is the box I check off. ;)
One can only assume that the uncivilized responses and misguided passion for America was stated by Americans. With that said, one would hope part of these citizens' appreciation of America is the right to free speech. Ergo, it would only make sense that these citizens would applaud and support Laurie on her opinion and input.
Well put. I've been wondering lately about blog and online comments that seem to be just vitriol but don't seem to shed any light on whatever the subject is that they are commenting on. Some sites and blogs are eliminating their comment features over it. It's too bad that people who feel angry are taking over means of communication that are otherwise very valuable just to vent about things that aren't even mentioned in the site or blog. As frustrating as times may be, and freedom of speech and the press notwithstanding, it really takes away from the utility of online (or any other communication) tool.
Laurie was attacked from the left for displaying a libertarian point of view. Nothing new there.