Changes seek more decorum in online conversations

One of the exciting advances that the World Wide Web enabled for the experience of reading a newspaper was the ability for readers to respond immediately to stories and engage in a dialogue with other readers. It's a wonderful way to create a sort of electronic version of the old community general store where people gathered to swap reactions and debate the news.

But when our Web folks created so-called "reader commenting" on dailyherald.com in February 2008, we quickly discovered some big differences between a traditional gathering around the ol' spittoon and a modern-day electronic dialogue via the Internet.

For one, a lot more people could crowd into the room - about 40,000 of them submitting comments on dailyherald.com at last count - which of course is good. But for another, not all of them cared about maintaining a sense of decorum in the discussion. It was easy for some people to mar the tone with tasteless, mean, lewd or downright irresponsible remarks, ranging from inappropriate comments about the appearance of people in pictures to disparaging remarks about other communities, racist diatribes about ethnic groups, various degrees of profanity and, perhaps most distressing of all, insensitive remarks about victims of accidents or tragedies.

We would allow none of these types of conversations in our letters to the editor columns, and we know that the Daily Herald's reputation is affected by the nature of the words we allow to appear in our pages and on our Web site. Moreover, we also know that this kind of behavior can turn away responsible commenters and ultimately defeat the purpose entirely.

So, our Web managers have struggled to find a way to encourage freewheeling and engaging discussions while also avoiding letting an irresponsible element hijack the forum and turn away readers who want to participate in a lively, productive examination of a topic. This week, they took a meaningful step in that direction.

They initiated revisions in the process that:

• Move the comments to a separate area to discourage less-serious commenters and allow people to read a story without having the discussion of it right in their faces.

• Let participants customize the level of responsibility they want to see among the comments to a story and "vote down" specific comments so they don't see them. If enough participants in a particular discussion vote down a particular comment, it is taken down so that no one can see it.

• Similarly let readers recommend posts so that serious commenters can sort offerings to concentrate on the most poignant ideas.

• Shut down commenting on a particular story after two weeks to discourage commenters who try to sneak in hateful or lewd remarks when monitors are not watching.

You'll find a more complete description of these changes at dailyherald.com. The system was implemented earlier in the week, and already our community of commenters seems to have adapted well. Indeed, our Web staff was very deliberative and conscientious in striving to develop a system that would continue to welcome and promote participation. We think the new arrangement strikes a good balance between allowing unfettered free speech and controlling the tone and content of a conversation.

It may not have the smell and feel and atmosphere of a chat around the coal furnace down at Mom & Pop's Corner Grocery, but it can help you share ideas with your neighbors and become more actively involved in the stories of the day.

Jim Slusher, jslusher@dailyherald.com, is an assistant managing editor at the Daily Herald.