During the Third Walk Bell John Awards, which recognize content creators, held on Nov. 13, many winners and presenters mentioned the problem of comments by Internet trolls.
The Internet age has brought one particular headache for the content industry: What to do about the comments sections on social media platforms?
Can they be left on their own? Can they function as a way to interact with readers? Can they be done away with entirely?
Journalism is a part of the content industry, and the content it produces is crucial to the public interest, which means that these issues are important.
The Poynter Institute, a US-based non-profit journalism school and research organization, has published a study by the Center for Media Engagement, Moody College of Communication at the University of Texas at Austin, that provides a map for considering these issues.
According to the study, a comments section has three characteristics. First, a small number of commenters generate the majority of the comments, essentially monopolizing the section. Second, interactions, if left unmoderated, often devolve into racist, misogynistic maelstroms. Finally, negative online comments on an article might influence a consumer’s decision about whether they want to read the article, but positive comments would not create a positive impression. This is also true for comments sections on social media platforms.
Why keep a comments section then? The study says it increases the time consumers spend on the Web site, and some journalists believe that a reader’s right to respond should be protected.
However, the comments section cannot be left unmoderated. My own experience working in the media tells me that, if it is left to its own devices, it would descend into chaos, generating only increasingly offensive and stupid opinions, in addition to advertising posts.
Unfortunately, given the current situation of the news industry, very few outlets have the resources to fully moderate their comments sections.
Should these sections be removed then? The online news media in the US did turn it off for a period; indeed, one can find lots of memes by googling the phrase “Do not read the comments.” It is not even as though many people would notice.
According to the study, when an outlet turns off the comments section, only 10 percent of the Web site visitors realize it. The downside of getting rid of it is the reduced time spent on the Web pages and the restriction of readers’ right to express their opinion.
A quick glance at the Web sites of the four major newspapers in Taiwan, and news Web sites such as Mirror Media, Up Media and the Reporter, shows that except for the Reporter, the rest have comments sections under their news and opinion articles, and they all use a Facebook comments plug-in, with the exception of udn.com, which uses both a Facebook plug-in and its own online commenting system.
Most of those comments sections are placed at the bottom of a Web page, making one wonder how many people actually read them. Perhaps keeping the comments section is just a product of inertia.
News outlets should carefully consider whether to keep or drop the comments sections on their Web sites. Although they could increase the time visitors spend on their site, they could also slow down the loading of a Web page.
Also, as the comments section appears at the bottom of a page, most people who read the articles do not scroll down to read the comments — if they do, the negative comments only put them off and discourage them from coming back to the Web site.
Lacking staff to moderate and manage the comments sections only leads to advertising and discriminating posts growing out of control.
Media outlets should turn off their comments sections for a while — or at least choose some categories for trial to see how it works. As for readers’ right to express their opinion, this can be guaranteed on the media outlets’ official pages on Facebook or other social platforms.
Chang Yueh-han is an adjunct assistant professor in Shih Hsin University’s department of journalism.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
The recent passing of Taiwanese actress Barbie Hsu (徐熙媛), known to many as “Big S,” due to influenza-induced pneumonia at just 48 years old is a devastating reminder that the flu is not just a seasonal nuisance — it is a serious and potentially fatal illness. Hsu, a beloved actress and cultural icon who shaped the memories of many growing up in Taiwan, should not have died from a preventable disease. Yet her death is part of a larger trend that Taiwan has ignored for too long — our collective underestimation of the flu and our low uptake of the
For Taipei, last year was a particularly dangerous period, with China stepping up coercive pressures on Taiwan amid signs of US President Joe Biden’s cognitive decline, which eventually led his Democratic Party to force him to abandon his re-election campaign. The political drift in the US bred uncertainty in Taiwan and elsewhere in the Indo-Pacific region about American strategic commitment and resolve. With America deeply involved in the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, the last thing Washington wanted was a Taiwan Strait contingency, which is why Biden invested in personal diplomacy with China’s dictator Xi Jinping (習近平). The return of
The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has long been a cornerstone of US foreign policy, advancing not only humanitarian aid but also the US’ strategic interests worldwide. The abrupt dismantling of USAID under US President Donald Trump ‘s administration represents a profound miscalculation with dire consequences for global influence, particularly in the Indo-Pacific. By withdrawing USAID’s presence, Washington is creating a vacuum that China is eager to fill, a shift that will directly weaken Taiwan’s international position while emboldening Beijing’s efforts to isolate Taipei. USAID has been a crucial player in countering China’s global expansion, particularly in regions where
Actress Barbie Hsu (徐熙媛), known affectionately as “Big S,” recently passed away from pneumonia caused by the flu. The Mandarin word for the flu — which translates to “epidemic cold” in English — is misleading. Although the flu tends to spread rapidly and shares similar symptoms with the common cold, its name easily leads people to underestimate its dangers and delay seeking medical treatment. The flu is an acute viral respiratory illness, and there are vaccines to prevent its spread and strengthen immunity. This being the case, the Mandarin word for “influenza” used in Taiwan should be renamed from the misleading