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
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
RSS