A communications expert talks about the blogsphere

[NJmaverick]

There is some very useful information here:

You are never going to win an argument with an online commenter. Most are not looking to engage in a meaningful dialogue. They are looking to take pot shots, to criticize and to not be held accountable for their comments. They are not anxious to look at another point of view, particularly yours, if you are the target of their animosity. Don’t waste time trying to convince them they are wrong and you are right. It’s like arguing with a slightly drunk relative at a family wedding who is yelling about one issue or another.

Could you imagine raising a contrary point of view in the middle of this family feud and your relative saying, “You know, Uncle Bob, that’s a great point. I never considered it. Maybe I should rethink my point of view.” It’s not going to happen at the family wedding and it’s not going to happen online.

Most anonymous commenters feel no need to check facts. Consider this personal experience: After numerous columns I’ve written for The Star-Ledger and NJ.com, I’ve seen many respond not debating a particular issue or point, but rather, to attack me personally or challenge my credentials. Some question whether I have a “real Ph.D.” One said, “Did you ever notice that Adubato never says where his doctorate comes from? He probably got it in the mail.” What am I supposed to say, that my doctorate came from Rutgers University in mass communication? Who cares? Plus, the author of that comment isn’t looking for the facts, he is looking to attack the messenger more than the message.

On the flip side, companies and individuals sometimes ignore a plethora of online comments that clearly communicate a groundswell of public opinion on a particular issue. When looking at commenters’ posts, it is important to note whether it is the same five or 10 people talking to each other totaling more than 100 comments or whether you have 100 comments from individuals. It’s not so much how many comments you get, but who they come from and what the specific themes and messages are.

I think there are some take aways from DU. Don't look at just recs. Look at the comments see how many are positive vs negative. The quantity and nature of the individual comments are far more accurate that the recs (that have been corrupted by freepers and sock puppets)

Another lesson is don't debate the hard corp anti-Obama people. Instead correct factual errors and offer up alternative opinion, but don't waste time in long debate as it is a waste of time.

As for the mood of DU and how it shows support for President Obama look at WHO is posting rather than just what is being posted. I have noticed the anti-Obama/anti-Dem stuff tends to be posted at least a half a dozen different times as the anti-Dems want to create illusions that their views are main stream (rather than the fringe 3% that polling has indicated).


http://www.nj.com/business/index.ssf/2010/03/lessons_learned_from_inside_th.html

[quiet.american]

1. Great post. nt

[HughMoran]

2. Man, ain't that the friggin' truth

I have to wonder why I let myself get sucked into the vortex at times - it serves no purpose. If one initially assumes that everything posted here is snark, the ride is so much better. Obviously non-snark will jump off the page at you, but I do best when I assume that everything is designed to get your goat.

Did you post this elsewhere?

[NJmaverick]

3. No, I posted it here for the benefit of my fellow BOGers

[HughMoran]

4. Well, I appreciate it

...prolly would induce a spasm in many anyway, just thought that this introspective look at online posting would be an interesting topic in a larger forum.

[Cha]

6. A total spasm..I think

we should keep this front and center for immediate reference.

[Cha]

5. THe author, Steve Adubatu, uses

my two words, "pot shots".

Thanks Maverick, It took me a few years to learn this on my own.

I particulaly like this.. "Most anonymous commenters feel no need to check facts. Consider this personal experience: After numerous columns I’ve written for The Star-Ledger and NJ.com, I’ve seen many respond not debating a particular issue or point, but rather, to attack me personally or challenge my credentials. Some question whether I have a “real Ph.D.” One said, “Did you ever notice that Adubato never says where his doctorate comes from? He probably got it in the mail.” What am I supposed to say, that my doctorate came from Rutgers University in mass communication? Who cares? Plus, the author of that comment isn’t looking for the facts, he is looking to attack the messenger more than the message."

[grantcart]

7. Yeah well where in the hell did you graduate from anyway CHA?

[Cha]

8. I didn't.

:)

[goclark]

9. Excellent nt

[gratefultobelib]

10. Good article!

[treestar]

11. Maybe, but like in life, you can find people like that too

So online you find both types.

I hate their alleged personal claims, like "I'm a veteran" (so no argument with me is allowed). used by right wingers during the war to allege we had no right to challenge the war - or worse, "My husband is in the military right now" (and how dare you question that the war is wrong).

No one can prove it on the internet, so using that stuff is merely an attempt to use emotions like that.

[Cha]

12. They have all kinds of tricks to shut down

debate on their disingenousness while they've got cotton stuck in their ears.

[Uzybone]

13. So very true

for all the wonderful things the internet has done, the blogosphere is IMO a giant stain that is contributing to the dumbing down of America.

The far left blogosphere is a particular disgrace. I expect the right wing to be idiotic, but the far left is trying hard to compete.

[Number23]

14. I've just visited both GD-P and GD and the contrast absolutely could not be more striking

or more excruciatingly ridiculous.

On a day when the news has been consumed by the rage from deranged Republicans, conservatives and their teabagging buddies, I swear that more than half of GD is still consumed with how "horrible" and "republican" the health care bill is. They are still impotently wailing and screaming every bit as much today as they were before the damned vote. Hell, I even saw a thread on Kucininch!!! :crazy:

GD-P is discussing the issue -- folks there are requesting that Democrats stick together now. I expected to go to GD and see a similar vein through the threads. There were about 2 or 3 requesting that people be vigilant about reporting threats and encouraging people to stick together. Those threads are woefully outnumbered by the threads STILL bemoaning passage of HCR.

Democrats -- Americans -- are being ATTACKED and supposed other Dems could give less than a ****. Their need to piss and moan about something that's a done deal is far more important than their need to support one another. It's really quite astounding. If this doesn't tell you everything you need to know about both forums and the type of folks participating in either, nothing will.

[greenbird]

15. I've noticed

that if you say something like "you make an excellent point there" or "I agree with part of what you say", these posters just vaporize. They don't want a civil discussion.

[stevenleser]

16. Good take on some of this by a friend at OEN

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_professo_070515_ethics_in_writing_ar.htm

[Cha]

17. Kick for continued relevance.

[Tarheel_Dem]

18. Hey Cha. I'm glad you kicked this, or I would have missed it.

:hi:

[Cha]

19. I'm really happy you saw it, Tarheel..

the more people see this article that we've been living the better!

:hi:

[Cha]

20. Kick

[Cha]

21. Perpetually relevant~