Also of concern, is the lack of a specific code of conduct for online contributors. This concept was explored on Radio National’s Media Report when three bloggers, George Megalogenis, Andrew Bartlett and Laurel Papworth, discussed the concept of ‘Civility online.’
The internet creates a forum where people from around the world can explore new ideas, leave comments and debate issues. However, the negative side of this is that we can also see verbal abuse being hurled and arguments veering totally off the topic. Media Report points out that 46% of respondents in a British poll ‘thought there was a need for some voluntary code of conduct for bloggers and online commentators.’
Megalogenis explains that he was particularly concerned that his blog was being dominated by the same people every time and that other readers who wished to respond might be intimidated by the negative comments and choose not to post. As a result, Megalogenis outlined on his blog that in the future, these unhelpful and abusive comments would simply not see the light of day. After leaving this post Megalogenis saw an increase in not only the number of respondents but, more importantly, also in the quality of responses.
For Megalogenis, quality of discussion is very important. He believes that the internet ‘can only really work for me if a) it’s interesting to me, I think b) to the readers.’ Without this focus on quality many comments on blogs revert into a shouting match with the issue under discussion drowned out completely.
Certain blogs may attract more passionate responses than others, but much of this online interaction would never be tolerated in a different forum. Are we going to see a rise in this type of behaviour as interaction on the net increases?
Papworth argues that the very nature of the Internet means that interactions like these are inevitable. When you have people contributing to a discussion from hugely varying backgrounds, each will bring their own ‘value system’ to the table. She also points out that blogs linked to ‘heritage media’ (newspapers, ABC) fail to ‘build community around their blogs.’ The contributors lack a profile on the site, making it hard for the blogger to form an idea about what sort of person they were and whether their comment is likely to be relevant.
Papworth believes if there was a reward system based around people’s comments, with awards being given for the year’s best comment, bloggers would have an incentive to regulate themselves.
This idea appealed to me, not only because it seems to suggest a solution to the issue of civility online, but also because it provides some formal recognition of the contribution that online interactions create. Will people regulate themselves? Or will this be a job for the host of each individual blog, to make the call based on their own vision for their site?
Hopefully, a bit of both. If we’re going to take the idea of a blog as part of new media seriously, then we have to play by the rules. Have a passionate debate, sure, but let’s leave the abuse, agenda pushing and slogan shouting at the door. These things only detract from the value a blog provides to the online community. Then we might see more people feeling comfortable enough to have their say, and a better discussion ensuing as a result.
The top 25 blogs in the world according to Time
Transcript: Civility online
Image source: http://img.timeinc.net/time/
2008/2008_best_blogs/ bestblogs_landing.jpg
No comments:
Post a Comment