My husband was blogging from the Republican National Convention. One of the desired features that favors blogging over strictly writing news stories is the ability to immediately receive comments. I am all in favor of dialogue, for hashing things out from more than one side is what brings about reasoned decision making-hence the basis for the adversarial legal system. But to make that truly work the comments must be credible. That cannot be the case if the commenter is not willing to disclose his/her identity.
As a result you get posts like this one which appeared on the bottom of one of Doug's blogs entitled "The media moment: Palin's speech unleashed delegate fury at the press":
"You republicans are total @$$holes, and I'd love to see every last one of you hideous wastes of flesh wiped out in a nuclear disaster. That'd truly do my heart good."
There are so many levels of commentary one could make back but this person is clearly in need of some medical help. But we don't know who it is so we are at a loss to come to his rescue. I ask you, what is the point?
Apparently someone saw fit to remove this comment so don't go to the blog to look for it. But here is the link anyway: www.azcentral.com/members/Blog/DougMacE
Ironically, though, they left all the comments about this comment so you can check those out if you are so inclined. Some of those commenters actually included a picture. Now that is gutsy!
1 comment:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v340/cowcowmoomoo1/arguingOnTheInternet.jpg
People who comment on those things are really strange. I mean, I've commented a couple times, and I'm generally entirely ignored because I'm not asserting white power, or calling anyone a racist. I get enough of this in coffee shops and lecture halls, and the internet takes it to an entirely different level with anonymity, where expressing your opinion can be taken to the next level of un-researched stupidity and distaste.
Post a Comment