The folks who spend an unhealthy amount of time on social media, tweeting out photos of their pet tricks or today’s breakfast, would have us believe that it’s all contributing to a more democratic and inclusive world, at a time when we need it most. If only that were true.
This week came more hard evidence that there are definitely curses along with the blessings when it comes to social media. The dear old CBC has stopped accepting comments on its website about stories dealing with Canada’s indigenous people. Those in charge say too many of the comments are ‘crossing the line’. That’s code for racist, and why are we not surprised.
The internet is an incredible blessing in so many ways. Every day as I prepare newscasts and commentaries like this one, I wonder aloud once again “How did we ever manage all our information without it?” The cyberworld is also a great ‘companion’ for countless numbers of shut-ins who would otherwise have very little contact with people beyond their small world.
But the down side are the people who abuse this wonderful opportunity and spread misinformation and downright hatred. It goes without saying that we should not believe everything we read that pops up on a computer screen or a smart phone.
Like the letters to the editor which have been around for decades, comments posted on news sites like www.CBC.ca tend to attract a rather noisy minority with too much time on their hands. Forums for democratic discussion come and go. Many are now seriously questioning the idea that it’s OK to be anonymous in all this. Perhaps it’s something whose time has come.
It would seem reasonable that if you have to put your name to a strong thought or opinion, you might just decide that it’s time to remember your mother’s sage advice ..
“If you can’t say something nice, maybe you should just keep quiet !”
I’m Roger Currie
I share your disgust for the hate-filled posts that pop up just about everywhere on the ‘Net. Requiring posters to use their real names might tone some of this down, but only some. Many folks who have racist ideas don’t see that there is a problem with what they believe and say; they don’t see themselves as racists.
Shutting down these commentators has the unintended consequence of hardening their belief in their own correctness. Unless people are challenged, they are unlikely to change their ways. For that reason, I’d prefer debate to censorship. That said, I also would like anonymity reserved for people who need it – whistle blowers, political dissidents in dictatorships, and the like. Anyone else who hides behind a pseudonym lacks the courage of their convictions and shouldn’t be taken seriously.