Everyone wants people to share and comment on their posts and businesses are no different. But as news organisations strive to boost engagement, offensive and abusive comments are such a problem that many want them banned.

Towards the end of my time in regional newspapers, I dealt with several complaints each day about online comments, whether it was on a website or social media post. They ranged from sarcasm to being offensive and even illegal, identifying victims in court cases or inciting hatred and violence.

A recent article on journalism news site HoldtheFrontpage.co.uk* revealed how bad the situation has become and there are now calls for all news organisations to ban online comments because they are more trouble than they are worth. They are probably right.

Media companies rely on the community they serve for the news they report. When long-standing contacts start telling you they have had enough of the abuse and will be keeping their distance, it’s time to act.

Those targeted in the comments included ordinary people who featured in articles in a positive news story, officials, teachers, etc. They understandably felt the comments could not be controlled and wanted them banned. 

However, it is not as simple as that. Engagement is king in this digital world and debate should be encouraged. But as numbers continue to shrink in newsrooms, there are fewer people to deal with the fallout.

In the pre-internet days, newspaper offices had piles of readers’ letters waiting to be published, responding to everything from court cases to changes to bin collections.

As technology developed and papers introduced websites to supplement their print editions, readers were able to comment directly on stories, which soon led to a drying up of traditional letters to the editor.

Unlike the print version, which required letters to be signed off with the correspondent’s name and address – which the newspaper still required even if the writer wished to remain anonymous – online commentators could register using vague or fictitious details. As long as they had an email address, they could have their say.

And this is where the problems began. As soon as a story appeared online, the trolls would pounce, diving in with offensive comments, hiding behind the anonymity of their keyboards. When issues are reported, the publisher must deal with the complaint and decide whether to amend or delete the comment and possibly ban the contributor. As time progressed, the offenders simply created more online aliases and continued their abuse.

I was amazed at how prolific some of them were, often writing more in a few posts than some reporters could manage in a shift.

Some created aliases similar to existing profiles and caused huge problems for the innocent parties as they spouted abuse, apparently in their name.

I even discovered that the more dedicated offenders would not only set up several aliases and argue with and abuse their alter-egos, they would then complain about the abuse they received!

News organisations have so far resisted calls to ban comments completely, instead opting to disable them on certain stories, but the trolls have found ways around this and simply spout their bile on other unrelated articles.

The situation is also different when posts appear on social media and the publisher has limited control over them. You can’t stop people commenting on your Twitter or Facebook posts, but you can react afterwards – once the damage has been done.

As much as it pains me to say it, unless they can be moderated before they are published, I think news organisations should call it a day with comments on articles. Gone are the days when it was a forum for discussion and debate. It has now become a hunting ground for trolls who target anyone and everyone. And the people they want to engage with have already withdrawn because of the abuse they received. 

* Here is the link to the HoldtheFrontpage article https://www.holdthefrontpage.co.uk/2020/news/bbc-journalist-urges-regional-press-to-shut-down-online-comments/