Giving people an opportunity to post their immediate reactions to news stories is a fairly recent phenomenon. Up until a few years ago, the only conversation a newspaper could really have with its readers in public was on its letters pages. They have always been among the most popular pages in a paper because people love to know whether others agree with their views. So it’s unsurprising that the introduction of web comments on stories has been a massive success. And sometimes the most unexpected stories elicit the most bizarre responses.
Take Rachel Picken's blog, Cornish Career Girl, uploaded on www.thisiscornwall.co.uk this week. The author, a Truro girl who had set up here own PR company, posted how delighted she was that 'Career Girl' was about to become 'Working Mum'. It was a celebratory post - she was sharing happy news with readers.
But it seems not everyone saw it that way. At time of writing, there were 45 posts in response to Rachel, starting with Mary of Polzeath: "Isn't she joint managing director of marketing, public relations, advertising and design agency, MPAD. Her husband was named as Best Individual in the 2009 Cornwall Sustainability Awards. Hardly what I would call a working mum." Now, where did that come from?
Utterly leftfield. And a bit spiteful. Rachel handled it pretty well... "I am very lucky to enjoy my work and I'm excited about what 2010 will bring, not to mention apprehensive because this is all new to me. I would appreciate it if everyone laid off the negative comments."
But why do people feel the need to be so negative in these comment posts? Is it because it's essentially anonymous and they can get away with saying anything they want to?
Up until now, we've mainly moderated our comments - publishing them only when we believe there's nothing racist or offensive or libellous within them. But we shouldn't have to. Why do people feel that the web should give them carte blanche to say to people what they would never say to them face to face? It's a real downside of this multimedia age.
Personally I'm all in favour of people engaging more with the paper and our website and with each other in response to our stories and posts, but I feel there's no need for all this negativity. If you've got nothing good to say, please don't say anything at all.
FoodieSarah has moved
7 months ago
Wow, I am surprised that no one has commented on this article... goes to show you how much information there is on the web that not everything is widely read...
ReplyDeleteRegardless, I appreciate the headline as I have been saying this for years: "If you've got nothing good to say, say nothing" Now I have I can quote this to people and have more credibility... The fact of the matter is if I say "X" is true, some people will merit my observation and other will think I am imagining this... However, If I say Jacqui Walls, editor of The Cornishman once stated "X" is true (in this case "If you've got nothing good to say, say nothing...") People will say what a good memory I have and how smart Ms. Walls is to have postulated this...
For many years I incorrectly attributed this statement to Will Rogers, who it appears was actually quoting a longer statement by the poet - George Eliot (1819-1880):
"Blessed is the man, who having nothing to say, abstains from giving wordy evidence of the fact."
Life is discovery...