As technological developments facilitate the transition from old to new media, readers' online comments are revolutionizing the public's relationship with the news. But this modern method of discourse often comes at a cost. User anonymity and newspapers' rights to censorship have become issues that need to be addressed, even here at the Tufts Daily.
Many objections to readers' comments on the Daily's Web site, TuftsDaily.com, stem from the fact that users are able to post completely anonymously. This means that many commentators cannot be held personally accountable for their posts, regardless of how obscene they are. Anonymity can also make it difficult to investigate and refute potentially inaccurate assertions. Many blame nameless posting for a perceived surge in unwarranted, uncalled-for and unjustifiable comments, as it gives users freedom from serious repercussions. Critics feel that if a person does not have the confidence and conviction to stand behind her comment, it is not worth publishing.
While the Daily appreciates this concern, forcing users who wish to post on our Web site to identify themselves by name or through e-mail verification is not a viable alternative.
A newspaper's job is to publish objective stories and to provide the public with information that might not otherwise be accessible. In doing so, the Daily hopes to raise awareness and to foster community discussion.
A newspaper's job is not to moderate reactions to its stories. And while the Daily does reserve the right to delete offensive and slanderous comments from its Web site, we do not intend on controlling community responses.
The Internet now provides everyday people with a means to post opinions, feelings and thoughts about the news. These reactions, even the disagreeable ones, are part of an important dialogue between news media and community members — particularly on a college campus. Online comments allow readers to interact with what they read in ways that were, until very recently, impossible. Community members are more involved in interpreting news than ever before, and their comments prove that newspapers are doing their jobs by sparking public dialogue.
Making readers register in order to post comments would discourage casual commentators from contributing to important discussions, and it would dissuade students with controversial views from sharing their opinions out of fear of being ostracized.
Ultimately, the benefits associated with anonymous posting outweigh its costs. It encourages even casual readers to participate in public discourse. It allows for diversity, as people in the minority can voice their opinions. Anonymous posting encourages debate and discussion among community members with varying opinions and backgrounds. And that's exactly what the Daily wants.
