But there is a world of difference between the traditional notion of public participation in a newspaper or magazine and the cacophonous, sometimes libelous free-for-all that passes for it today. Whereas the old-fashioned letter to the editor involved crafting a letter, figuring out where to send it, springing for a stamp, and knowing that its publication-worthiness would be determined by an actual editor who might even call and suggest some actual edits, today’s readers are invited to “join the conversation” as if the work of professional reporters and columnists carries no more authority than small-talk at a cocktail party.
Meghan Daum, “Haterade”, in The Believer
This is easily one of the top pieces I’ve read on the toxicity of comments sections and the shouty-shouty nature of internet discourse in the modern era. “Joining the conversation” is bullshit; it’s only worth it in fora where the commentariat is thoroughly self-policing and well-organized (usually in well-moderated blogs or boards that have been around since before 2001). Anyone considering a comments section, whether a private blogger or a national newspaper, should ask themselves whether having “a conversation” for their readers is worth the energy and resources it will take to provide a bunch of assholes with a free, unaccountable platform to say whatever they like, up to and including threats of physical harm.
(via hangingfire)