If you’re reading this piece, you’ve seen them. Clinging to their anonymity like barnacles to local online bulletin boards, they seek out differing opinions and fire indiscriminately. It doesn’t matter what the discussion thread’s topic is—the only thing that matters is screaming down their opposition. What gets killed in the process is any hope for a meaningful exchange of ideas. It represents an eerie companion to the dysfunction of our current town council: rhetoric over meaningful cooperation, venom over professional respect.
This is not to say anonymity is wrong in itself: any visit to local discussion boards reveals that most everyone posts behind an online identity other than their own. The Stratford Observer itself offers no hints as to the identity of the authors for the very same reason: it just plain gets ugly on there! Who wants the guy who posts intolerant anger twenty times a day stopping by for a visit?
Unfortunately, this creates a vicious cycle: anonymity breeds a sense of detachment, which frees these posters from personal accountability for what they write, which leads them to write more reckless and inflammatory diatribes, which leads others to react in kind, and so on. What’s left behind is the debris of an issue that never gets addressed. These trolls, as people who make a habit of "stirring the pot” rather than engaging in discussion are called, kill any hope of the generation of new ideas that this community might create. In truth, the very term “discussion thread” is lost among them. They are not interested in discussions but rather in monologues, drowning out all voices in search of the spotlight that never stays.
In my opinion, it doesn’t matter what side of the fence you’re on—no one benefits from the fuming of fools. Rather than the thoughtful exchange of ideas, they offer snide potshots while desperately trying to hide the fact they’re bereft of ideas. They’re not going away, however, so we’re left to cope with them as best we can. Ignore them and their childish tantrums begin to lose their luster. Focus on the discussions and try to learn from the other side and offer counter-arguments. With the collective wisdom of 50,000 citizens, maybe we can solve some of these problems on our own and present them to town government. Put simply, we need to put the “discussion” back in discussion boards.
Feed your head, not the trolls!
Posts
2 comments:
The Stratford Observer once again proves to me what I know to be true: that the Town of Stratford is full of great, engaged, caring and intelligent people (you ARE from Stratford, right?).
In the short time this blog has existed it is obvious that this blog stands for thoughtfulness, intelligence and fair and balanced coverage of issues.
Don't we all want those things as a baseline for any real "dialouge" or "conversation".
Now, that does not mean I agree with 100% of each thought or thread. But rather, different opinions are stated in an unconfrontational manner with respect that there could be a differing viewpoint.
As for hiding of ones identity let me say this: I am 100% for freedom of speech but no one should be able to post under the cloak of a pseudonym without being responsible for libel.
Like most reforms that Congress refuses to address (they would rather waste time investigating steriod use in baseball)the courts will ultimately have to weigh in on this issue. Maybe the other blog in Stratford will be the test case.
In any event, let me again invite all of those who are reading this to post here. It will be more enriching experience.
I find it amazing that people will read the "National Enquirer" of Stratford blogs and even occassionaly post there (although lets be honest, the main culprits are a handful of anti-mayor zealots). Why? Because many Americans are lazy and want to be entertained. This is the land of the WWE and Reality T.V. after all.
Plus, it takes time to research, investigate, learn the facts and then write a thoughtful analysis rather than an ignorant or pithy entry. In other words, it is work and requires some brain power and writing ability.
Well, I guess we have the National Enquirer and the New York Times in this country and both sell. We also have junk food and health food. It is all about choice.
I may occassionally peek at the National Enquirer (and eat some junk food) but I am a more informed person for subscribing to the New York Times (and working out).
Or, at least I try.
Thank you for the kind words, Thor. I have to admit that I was hoping for a few more comments as well, but maybe that's too much to expect after only one week in existence. I hope that there is an audience out there for looking at both sides instead one of one.
Post a Comment