Private? Public? Somewhere in between?

I have seen this a lot lately. Rude, insensitive comments on posts, many of them totally tangential and not about the main issue discussed in the blog at all. MadMomma brought it up in her latest post as well. She is wondering why blog posts get hijacked and taken in a completely different direction by the readers of the blog? I have been thinking about it as well and have been wanting to write a post on it. My take is a little different on it. Maybe because I have a very limited readership and my posts don't get as many comments as Mad Momma's posts do, it doesn't bother me in the same way it bothers her.

To me, it is kind of interesting how different readers pick up different points from the same post. How they interpret the same thing differently. Much like two siblings might form different attitudes about life in general based on their experiences under similar circumstances. People take away different life-lessons from same situations. For example, I believe in God though I do not follow any organized religion but my brother is an atheist. We grew up together and our parents behaved exactly the same with us in this reagrd. They showed us their beliefs and we saw them taking part in Havans and other religious activities yet both of us developed different beliefs. That is the strength of a human mind. Two minds can come up with two different thoughts under the same circumstances. There is no fixed formula to how minds work. And I think that is why different readers interpret the same post differently. I have also seen, and found it interesting, that different readers pick up different parts of the same post to comment on. So, for a simple post that might tackle different parenting issues ranging from baby food to sleep habits, education and discipline, I am sure I will get varied comments on different parts of the post. And, to me, that is the beauty of blogging. It feels just like when you are sitting with friends and a topic of discussion comes up. Everyone puts in their two cents and sometimes they veer off to something totally different. Sometimes I get a comment on a post of mine that make ME think differently about the issue that has been commented upon.

This is all fine and dandy when we are talking about regular readers of our blogs. We write a post, they read the post, and then everyone shares their opinions in the comments section. Sometimes it even becomes a "I scratch your back, you scratch mine" fest :D Or as one would say in Sanskrit - "परस्परम् प्रशंसति, अहो रूपम् अहो ध्वनि!" [Begin digression: This Sanskrit phrase comes from a story. Once a camel and a crow met. After getting acquainted, they started praising each other. The crow said "Oh, what a beautiful face!" and the camel said "Oh, what a melodious voice!" : End digression] Now, don't take it otherwise. I mentioned the phrase in the most affectionate and humorous way. It feels good to give and receive praise and it builds goodwill all around - something all of us could use on any given day.

Sometimes that doesn't happen. For bloggers like MadMomma, Megha, Rohini and many others who fearlessly express their opinions on a variety of issues, along come the special class of readers and commentors - the NASTY ANONYMOUS reader/commentors. This is where things mostly get out of hand. Now again, it is perfectly fine to comment anonymously as long as you do so with civility and respect for the owner of the blog. But what happens generally is an anonymous reader would leave a rude comment on some totally irrelevant part of the post and then a commenting war ensues. I have been part of one such war at Megha's latest post. And I am ashamed to say that towards the end I became catty. That is when I realized that I needed to bring my thoughts away from her space and jot them down in my own. In my defense I would say that I engaged in it in the first place because I couldn't just stand by and see Megha being attacked for her views in her OWN space.

Most of the times, the main argument that these anonymous commentors (henceforth ACs or NACs - Nasty Anonymous Commentors) give in the support of their rude comments is that the blogger called it upon themselves by airing their issues in a "public space". [Begin digression 2: One AC called it a "public forum". Now, isn't that repetitive? A "forum" is a place for public to gather and have discussions (ref. --> Dictionary.com) . A "public forum" becomes a "public place for public to gather"? Anyway, I am just splitting hair! :End digression 2] What they don't realize is that a blog ["a personal chronological log of thoughts published on a Web page": ref. --> dictionary.com] is NOT a public space. Yes, it is available for everyone to read (based on the settings) and comment. But it is not open for everyone to write POSTS on. It belongs to the owner of that particular blog. The comment section may be considered public but in that case one should behave as one would in any other public place - with civility and dignity. If they don't like what they read, they have two options - comment with civility or go to their own space and vent about it.

The second argument meted out is that if a blogger activates comment moderation on their blog, they 1) do so to drown out all dissenting voices, 2) deserve such comments because of what they write about and they can choose not to publish them, 3) are cowards, 4) should stop complaining, 5)do not support free speech 6) are hypocrites and so on. I'll tackle these one by one.

A blogger activates comment moderation to drown out all dissenting voices. Bloggers choose to moderate comments for various reasons. One of those reasons IS to filter out rude, insensitive jerks who don't know how to express a differing opinion in a civilized manner. I don't see most of these bloggers criticizing everyone who differs from them in their opinions, only those who do it in an uncivilized way. Nothing wrong with that. I have seen plenty of comments that disagree with the bloggers' opinions (on MadMomma and Megha's blogs, for example). The fact that these comments were allowed in the comment section shows that these bloggers are not afraid of, or intolerant of contradicting opinion.

These bloggers deserve such comments because of what they write about and they can choose not to publish them. I beg to differ. No one deserves rude, insensitive or threatening comments for what they write, however controversial it might be. One - lets not forget that they are airing their opinions in THEIR PERSONAL SPACE. They don't come to YOUR blog to write these posts. Two - AGAIN - you can disagree. But be civil, be decent, be polite. If you still don't like what they wrote or how they reacted to disagreeing comments, leave. You can make the choice not to read what they write.

I listen to various radio programmes on my way back from work. The one I catch the most is hosted by Dr. Michael Savage. Now, Dr. Savage most times behaves according to his last name. That is his style. He bulldozes all his callers if they happen to disagree with him. He bulldozes even those callers who agree with him. I don't particularly like that even though sometimes he does have interesting and informed opinions about the topics he discusses. So, as soon as he starts doing that I switch channels. Simple as that! I could call in and tell him how I feel but I know that's not going to make a difference. Besides - it is HIS program. HE decides how to behave on it. If anyone is willing to take that kind of treatment from him, they call him. Those who can't, don't. Same goes with blogs, in my opinion.

These bloggers have comment moderation on because they are cowards. From what I have seen on most blogs that have comment moderation on is that the bloggers are not trying to hide behind that censorship. They love a good debate. Bloggers might, as I mentioned earlier, have various reasons for turning comment moderation on, but cowardice is usually not one of them. This is just a juvenile accusation to prove one's point at every cost.

Bloggers who have comment moderation on should stop complaining. Why? Why should someone stop complaining about the rude treatment they are getting from someone else? Just because they set up a filter on a PERSONAL site? It is like saying that a person should not complain about a robbery attempt at their home if they have a security system in place. Surely the robbery attempt was unsuccessful BECAUSE they had that security system. Similarly, if these bloggers didn't have comment moderation, the rude comments WOULD have made it through to their comment space and polluted the whole space. Just because I might have comment moderation on does NOT give someone the license to send me rude, threatening or obscene comments! I am pretty sure that these NACs won't stop spreading their vile comments even if comment moderation were removed from all blogs.

Bloggers who turn comment moderation on do not support free speech. Again, a misconception in these un/mis-informed minds, I am sure. Also, free speech comes with responsibilities. Just because you have freedom to speak, does not mean you can speak trash to or about someone else. Basic manners! Would you go to some one's house or approach someone in a "public space" IN PERSON and speak as harshly? Would you express your opinions with such abandon if you had to reveal your identity? Free speech is all good and noble, but only when it doesn't attack other people's right to speak out their minds. That too in their own spaces. If only we applied the same rules of etiquette to our blog comments, that we apply to our conversations with real live people, this issue wouldn't even arise. And it is interesting to note that the advocates of free speech are all conveniently ACs! And no. Adding a letter or an initial (or even a name, which could be fictional for all we know) at the end of your comment does not mean you have adequately revealed your identity. Create your own blogger profile, log in with that profile and THEN leave a nasty comment. You won't. Because then you can be traced back to your personal space and attacked. See what I mean??

Bloggers who have comment moderation on are hypocrites. Whatever generated this idea? Again, the NACs are confusing the bloggers' right to write in their own space with everyone else's right to comment in a public domain. And comment moderation does not equate to "killing all disagreeing comments" as I have already pointed out. These bloggers are just demanding a little bit of respect for themselves in their own space. Not too much to ask!

As for commentors hijacking the blog by airing their opinions rudely over some unrelated topics - DON'T GO THERE! Read the post first. Otherwise you appear stupid for arguing over something that was not discussed or something that was not the point of the post anyway. Yes, it is easy to mistakenly do so. But it is not easy to be "mistakenly rude". THAT needs effort. There is a difference between just taking the comment off the tangent and hijacking the comment section with rude comments over personal agendas.

I would say the Internet has changed the concept of privacy. So it is easy to mistakenly consider someone else's blog a public domain. Even then, if one would just remember the general rules of behaving in a public space, things won't appear so wrong. One wouldn't be verbally abusive to public speakers even if one disagreed with their opinions. One wouldn't stand up and accuse someone of being a coward, bad parent, bad employer, bad friend or some such thing in a public gathering. The cloak of anonymity gives a person the misplaced strength to do so. It makes a coward out of THEM. Because if they had the courage, if they thought they were correct, they wouldn't do it anonymously.