Okay, so most of you know that my day job is writing, editing and maintaining Nashville Is Talking. This means I get to interact with some really cool, smart, funny people day in and day out. It also means I get to interact with angry, anonymous assholes. This likely does not surprise you, if you know much about blogs at all. They can bring out the crazies.
However, because it is my job to interact with the local blogging community, and not something I do on my own time, there are a whole different set of rules for me. I cannot call someone names, despite the string of pejoratives they just hurled at me. I cannot curse at them, no matter the number of four-letter, degrading words they send my way. I cannot block people from commenting or moderate the comment submissions at all. I just have to sit back and take it.
Most times I hold my own though. I try to let the anger subside when someone goes off on me, and respond as fairly and calmly as I can. Basically, I try to act like a professional in a world full of amateurs. (And I don’t mean that snobbily. Just literally. I’m paid, they aren’t.) This means that the playgrounds aren’t exactly level.
I write this because there are a handful of regular commenters at Nashville Is Talking, with blogs of their own, who use one name or handle to be sweet and funny and thoughtful, but another name entirely when they want to be insulting or rude or disagree. I know this because Movable Type tracks IP numbers. Sometimes JEFF (a name I made up) will be FRED when he wants to be an angry asshole and next time HANK and next time JOSH. And sometimes a commenter will have an entirely seperate alter ego. For instance, STACY (another name I made up) will be STACY for all things light and entertaining and otherwise innocuous, but then be FRANK when she wants to be mean. It’s the craziest thing. An otherwise normal seeming woman with a polite little blog about her polite little life has this pseudonym that she leaves nasty comments under. Frankly, it hurts my feelings.
Anyway, my dilemma is this: Do I treat STACY and FRANK like two different people, even though I know they are not? If FRANK accuses me of lying while lying about who he is, then isn’t it okay that I come out and call them on their whole charade? Or do I need to respect their ability to be whoever they want to be online and continue pretending they are two different people, and addressing them as such? Because, honestly, it gets hard to keep up.
Any thoughts on this are appreciated. Comment will be moderated, because I can.
38 comments ↓
well, bitch . . . No, I kid.
If they engage in lame insults, ignore them and they will get bored eventually. Don’t feed trolls.
And I would out every sockpuppet. If ’sweet/nice blogger’ is the same as ‘rude/mean’ blogger, do a post on it on the main page. refer to them always as their blog nom de plume.
My $0.02.
It is important to take IP addresses with a grain of salt. The IP represents an internet connection, not a computer (at least as far as Movable Type is concerned). While it is pretty safe to say that FRANK and STACY are the same person if the IP address is owned by Comcast, it is less so for carriers who offer business accounts.
Since everyone at an employer uses the same outgoing internet connection, they all show the same IP address. This is same for other large employers in Nashville too like Belmont University. (I am mentioning Belmont because I know about their IP addresses, not their commenters).
If you want to find who owns an IP address then search here: http://www.arin.net/whois/
I’m well aware, Jackson. I get what you are saying. But after a year and half, I know for a fact that those I speak of here are indeed using “sockpuppets.”
When I click on your IP number and the comments–all 75 of them–look like this:
FRANK
STACY
STACY
STACY
STACY
FRANK
FRANK
STACY
…and so on. I’m 99% sure that they are the same person. Also, their writing styles and spelling errors and such are similar. I would never “out” someone unless I knew beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Because how embarassing would that be?
yeah, when things get ugly, I think it’s often good for the blog owner to just not respond in the comments. Let the commenters duke it out, but stay above the fray yourself. And, actually, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with just not reading the comments to a certain post if the stuff there has gotten out of control.
I don’t know that outing them is going to solve anything, especially since I remember all the hullabaloo the last time that happened at NiT. I hate seeing you get reamed.
Perhaps there’s some really swift way to make your point about knowing who they are. Like, address Frank in the comments by referencing something from Stacy’s blog, so that that person would pick up on the fact that they’re not fooling you.
People can be such immature assholes. I’m sorry that has to happen to you.
Yeah, an actual outing would be bad. I’d definitely go about it in a subtle way. But I have to really resist going: I KNOW IT’S YOU! The jig is up!!
This post alone might help. Once people know that you’re on to the identity-switching, then that’s usually game over.
On the other hand, you’re part of a business and hosting a business site. I cannot walk into a local restaurant and abuse the hostess nor can I vilify the owner repeatedly without being tossed out on my ear. There are standards of behavior enforced on you as an employee — avoid profanity when possible, conduct yourself in a civil manner — that should also be in play for visitors. That seems like a simple matter of meeting with your employer and adopting some “play nice” groundrules that you publish. Sure, someone will squawk about feeling silenced. He or she can get their own site and blah-blah until hell freezes over. But you don’t have to provide them a platform and a large audience.
You’ve hit on something that I’ve thought about over at NiT. It’s easy to just be another “name” to say nasty things because then your regular persona doesn’t have to be responsible. People say things to each other “virtually” that they would never say in person because then they would have to deal with the repercussions, conflict or change in perceptions for the image they have built for their virtual selves.
There is a blogger that I cannot stand and more than once I have been tempted to comment under a different name and say what I really think about them, just so I personally wouldn’t have to feel mean or uncomfortable if I had to meet them in person at some point. But then I stop and think, I shouldn’t write anything that I wouldn’t say to someone in person or be ashamed to put my own name on. But it’s tempting and it would be really easy.
Maybe it’s human nature, but this is a frequent problem with all boards and internet chat forums. Perhaps there is a greater technical control/policeman that you can use. Would Rex H. be a good resource for ideas? I know there are IP address controllers out there and ways to limit multiple logins from the same IP.
Generally, I agree with those who have said that calling out these bozos probably won’t do much good in the long run. That’s the practical side of me speaking.
The cranky skeezer side of me says to do it. Why be delicate with people who don’t have the cojones to own up to their comments? If someone is so concerned with shielding their identity when posting their opinion, perhaps they should refrain from posting it in the first place. If they make the conscious decision to be deceitful, they have to be prepared for the possibility that someone is going to call them on it. They should have to live with the repercussions of their choices.
As much as I’d love to see you call these people out though, I do think that by doing so you’re going to open yourself up for more headaches than if you just let them continue their “anonymous” trolling.
I guess it boils down to which side of you wins out — the practical one, or the skeezer one. There are benefits to both, but if you go the skeezer route (and I’m not calling you a skeezer, just putting this in terms that I can relate to, because I AM a skeezer) I would imagine you’d have to be prepared for some major bs from these people. Would it be worth it?
Personally I see no real ethical dilemma in outing someone if you are reasonably sure — but like Jackson said, an IP address can represent one person or it can represent 1000, so you need to be confident..
But I have dealt with this sort of thing before (amanda’s psycho-ex), and it’s always pretty amusing when people make a fool of themselves hiding behind a veil of anonymity that doesn’t exist because they don’t understand the technology they think they’re hiding behind..
That said, I hate to burst your bubble — I know for a fact that “The Internet” and “News2ActionDog” are two different people. Well, one’s a dog.
Brittney, I may not agree with everything you say or your viewpoints, but that doesn’t excuse me from hiding behind a mask to nail you either. Bridgett is right: Don’t provide them a platform or audience. If you feed it, they’ll end up hijacking the site.
When I worked at Promise Keepers, a Christian men’s ministry, I use to get nailed all the time in print or TV (before there were blogs) and sure it hurt - especially if the accusation was totally off base. A simple phone call would have sufficed. I can defend / dialog about our stance, but don’t attack me or my family personally. Nonetheless, have a thick skin and be professional about it - the contrast will be stark and you’ll serve as an example of class. Hang in there; I’ve got a lot of respect for you.
Kerry, I really appreciate that, and the feeling is mutual. Honestly, I think this post really made me feel a lot better about the whole thing, and I don’t feel as angry. Hopefully the right people will read this and reconsider their behavior. I’m working on that thick skin, but it sure does take a long time to grow.
Kristina, I’ve got a bit of redneck in me, in that I am quick to fight. If someone fucks with me, I’m ready to rumble in a heartbeat. Not healthy, and I totally blame my passionate family for that trait. But since this is my job, and I’d like to keep that job, I think I’ll let my classy side win out and just let this post serve as my catharsis.
bridgett, that is good advice. I’d love to lay some ground rules about acceptable behavior in the comments, but I wonder if doing that would provide more ammunition for the trolls who think NIT is a blog they’d like to take down. I’d like to keep things as permissive as possible, and I think Mike Sechrist does, too. You should see the venom he allows at his site by people under assumed names. Nasty.
Thanks for all the great responses. I think I just needed to vent. I need to learn that I don’t have to respond to every taunt disguised as a question that is thrown my way.
I’ve had more than my share of haters, as you might imagine. Some anonymous and some not. And I’ve been able to track down some of the anons, but not the majority. Overall, ignoring the haters has worked best, but it doesn’t work on all of them. Commenting back and returning the vitriol only seems to spur them on.
There was on worse than most others, saying all sorts of mean angry things about me personally and all homeless people. With the help of another, I was able to track this guy down to his place of employement. He worked as a public defender in a small town in New Mexico. My many pleas to this guy to stop the harassment didn’t help any. So, I emailed his boss. I never heard from the guy again.
btw - to be honest, I too have sent mean tempered comments to people under seudonyms. Not often, but It’s really tempting.
I wish you’d out them just because I am so curious :) of course I have no idea what the drama was before that jag mentions. but seriously, if you don’t have the guts to say something under your real name…seems to me you shouldn’t be saying it, and I’m not sure I can think of a good reason why you shouldn’t be outed. I don’t know, though.
have to say, I respect you for trying to think through this reasonably and fairly. I remember how frustrated I felt the last time I guest blogged and felt a bit attacked (in a very minor way) in the comments. to deal with it all the time on more significant levels–can’t be fun.
You already have the advantage of knowing. Tuck your knowledge away for a time when you can use it ethically, but also to keep the upper hand. Play along; that may cause STACY/FRANK to grow complacent and make mistakes that lead to her own undoing. I would counsel patience. A day of reckoning tends to come one way or the other.
Brittney,
There’s no ethical dilemna at all. Duplicitous “sock puppets” are a step below anonymous trolls, and deserve even less consideration.
Out them at a time when you can gain maximum effect, and sleep contently.
And… if it gets so nasty that you can’t restrain the urge to respond, you can always simply use the URL to this post (or another that’s as professional as you wish to make it), calling it “Brittney’s trolling policy.”
.
I don’t envy you at all my dear! I don’t have a very thick skin (though it’s grown a lot through blogging!), I probably would of cut bait and run a long time ago. My blogging maxim has always been, “If I don’t want to take credit for what I’m saying then I shouldn’t say it all”. A fairly similar sentiment that’s already been expressed in these comments.
And I’m so dying of curiousity about who you are talking about ;-)
Chin up girl - you are FABULOuS!!!
Mike would not allow a masked looney to burst into the newsroom and rave at you; he’d call the cops. The business purpose of NIT, as I understand it, is community-building, news-gathering, and branding. None of those purposes are served by tolerating the lobbing of insults and invective at an employee of the station.
There are, in numerical terms, only a few people who have a bee in their bonnet about NIT and whatever community leverage that they have, you’ve unwittingly multiplied by tolerating their nastiness. You haven’t won over these relatively few naysayers by allowing them free reign, so I wouldn’t fear to cut them loose if they can’t behave themselves in a moderately civil manner. Part of NIT’s maturation and an indication of its success is that you can now think of it as a place of business. Let them take their custom elsewhere if they don’t like what you’re selling.
By the way, I should say that I don’t live anywhere near Nashville, so take this as the views of a carpetblogger.
Your job is a relatively new category, and this is a very interesting topic to bring up. The issues of anonymity in blogging are tricky, and they will have to be sorted out soon because folks are getting themselves into a whole lot of trouble by posting “anonymously.” In my job, I get occasionaly mean anonymous comments, and I swear my skin gets thinner every time. It is very hard not to respond, but all you end up doing is getting into a pissing contest that you won’t feel good about.I think you should keep your information close to your vest and let the two-faced snipers hang themselves. And definitely don’t let them guest-blog over the weekend!
Ranks Ror Rhe Ruprort, Rhris Rage.
Belmont!!! I know a former volleyball assistant there.
Anyhow, I feel almost any job is a “customer service” job. Therefore, it is unfortunately your responsibility to treat all posters with at least a distant amount of respect. If you have concerns about sock puppets and the like, refer these concerns to a supervisor or IT person or whatever. Unless you are the one and only person who owns that blog, you unfortunately don’t have much right in most places of work to get angry at your “customers” (those that post on it). I’d hate to see the blog taken away from you (I’ve only seen that blog once, but it is a project of Channel 2, isn’t it?).
Good luck with the customers, and talk to your bosses about issues like this. :)
Man, we have sock puppets *already* over at Parents Connect, so I know how you feel, kinda.
I laugh about it with my colleagues that know who the sock puppets are, and keep my mouth shut on the blogs.
Love,
STACY. Er, I mean, FRANK.
There’s nothing unethical about stating facts that were obtained through willful submission. If you stick to “Frank and Stacy are both posting from the same IP, and I think it is the same person”, that’s fact and opinion clearly delineated. If Frank/Stacy is ignorant of how the internet works, that doesn’t absolve their duplicity. You aren’t being sneaky in obtaining their IP numbers or violating their privacy in any way.
There is no reason to tolerate personal attacks against you in your workplace. Calling your ideas dumb is criticism. Calling you dumb is a personal attack. Ban their IP and let them complain. You aren’t running a charity, and if the personal attacks interfere with you doing your job, then it is in the best interest of your employer to let you put a stop to them.
I might say something like, BTW, I know who you are, “Frank” in the comments the next time that happens and I think it’ll scare the shit out of the person.
Trolls suck. And just remember that 99.9% of people out there think you’re awesome.
Well Brittney,
I’d look at the matter thus: you are a journalist. Revealing factual information is what journalists do. Given a reasonable level of certainty, I don’t see anything at all unethical or professionally inappropriate about exposing someone’s charade. In fact, I see it as an inherent part of being a reporter, which is, in its own odd, post-digital kind of way, exactly what you are.
That said, I would still favor the subtle option that lets the troll know the score without making the matter public. That’s also a convenient insurance policy in the (however unlikely) event that you may be wrong.
The moral of the story, though, in the end, is that trolls thrive on recognition. They are most often unaccomplished or unpopular bloggers themselves who find it easier to siphon off someone else’s audience than to produce anything of public merit themselves. No matter how hard (or perhaps because of how hard) you bitch-slap them, they will continue to come back for more, because in troll logic, bad attention is infinitely preferable to no attention; it’s better to be a martyr than a nobody.
In any case, you’re doing a great job, and are wise to sort this dilemma out off the clock. A lot of what passes for thick skin among bloggers is actually just what you are doing–learning to vent in the most appropriate venue.
I didn’t read what everyone else said because I’m lazy. Honestly, I would love that you out them but I know you’d get in trouble because that’s just the sucky corporate world. It can be so tough to be a blogger - all the mean “anonymous” comments are nearly as frustrating as the anonymous silent stalkers. I had an old hag say something rude to me at work this week about my blog. I’m thinking she found it via google because of a has been celebrity she stalks regularly. She made a rude, snooty comment to me “I just don’t understand why people would rather look at pictures of your blistered feet than a good looking man.” She was talking about Justin Guirini, who is certainly not a good looking person or man. Anyway, people who try to hide behind something are just rude pricks. I think you certainly have a tough job!!
Hey –
I’m not local to Nashville (or Tenneessee) but I noticed you linked to my site in a NIT thread about LGF.
I just wanted to say thank you and hope you come back to the site more often.
Thanks again.
Hi Brittney,
Frankly, I’m not sure why your NIT site doesn’t have a temporary/permanent banning policy for those who post abusive comments. Going further, you mentioned in your post something to the effect that you aren’t allowed to moderate comments? That’s harsh.
In the past I have submitted a healthy number of comments at the Volunteer Voters site, but Mr. Kleinheider never let them see the light of day (I don’t think I’ll try commenting there again). For whatever reason he seems to have eminent latitude with comment moderation.
I would recommend that you talk to your boss and draw up a formal policy for NIT concerning commenting and publishing the IP addresses of abusive commenters.
In particular, I would go so far as to display screen captures on the site that graphically depict what you are speaking of here; that is, how JOSH and FRED are actually, in all the highest probability, the same individual.
Right now, without a policy in place, and if you are as impotent to do anything about these sad, emotionally constipated individuals as you say you are, then I can easily see why you are so upset.
I’m rooting for you, Brittney!
-Tim
In the past I have submitted a healthy number of comments at the Volunteer Voters site, but Mr. Kleinheider never let them see the light of day (I don’t think I’ll try commenting there again). For whatever reason he seems to have eminent latitude with comment moderation.
Tim, it is not my habit to delete or moderate comments. I certainly wouldn’t delete or hold any comments by you — not intentionally anyway.
I hope you’ll reconsider and please email me if you have any problems with your comments appearing.
You could just do a piece on the evolution of ethics in the blogosphere; how this wonderous new medium brings new challenges to communication etiquette. Sort of set the stage and then lay out THE POSSIBILITY that one could simply out the duplicitious buggers. And then just let them twist in the wind, waiting…
I realized that I use different handles to comment, depending on whether it’s work or personal. But I never, ever crap all over someone else’s parade, under the guise of being a different person. That smacks of a multiple personality disorder and is just plain wrong.
Working in news, I get complaints a lot and people not liking me at all. I get more positive feedback actually.
In the blogging world I have e-mailed only one person on my blog whose trolling became vindictive toward other commentators. ]I thought it was too harsh.
I responded.
I also give people face to face time when there is a disagreement at the paper. I realize you work in a metropolitan city where that isn’t possible.
But, if someone hides behind insulting trolling at your site and not being upfront about that other times they use another alias, then they have opened themselves up for you to respond. You have that right, and aren’t they being a bit dishonest?
Instead of agreeing to disagree with you, they lie about who they are.
Sorta seems shady to me.
It’s your choice on how to do that.
Maybe these people need a little reminder that the internet is not quite as anonymous as they may hope or think.
Brittney,
There are people online that seem to like being different people in themselfs….some act totally different but when in front of you they are not like that..it happens everyday online but this is a site NIT for everyone to see and since this is with WKRN there should be the same rules if the blog was on t.v. ….the blog you run at work is a place to voice opinions but they should not hurt anyone or be offensive….I enjoy reading NIT even though sometimes it gets boring with all the politics…I enjoy the funny things you put on their. I ways always if you cant say something nice then dont say anything at all….love your work and keep up the good work and dont let them get you down
Just chanced on your blog and so far I’m liking it. There are assholes everywhere, so I guess you have to expect for the blogosphere to have its fair share, especially when they have the freedome to be anonymous asses. I’d go for the name and shame angle, although I understand the hesitation as to do that and turn out to be wrong would be very embarrassing. Or can you simply just delete them?
I write three blogs. One is a fairly apolitical arts blog, the other two aren’t. I try to segregate the handles connected to the political blogs from the one connected to the apolitical arts one. (I don’t see the need to politicize everything). That said I would never switch noms de plume or handles within the comments section of a blog I was visiting, if I was commenting at someone else’s blog. That wouldn’t be kosher. (I gather sometimes when people get banned for jumping ugly on somebody else, they try to circumvent it by changing names). It is definitely okay to out someone who is trying to use multiple personas on your blog. Your tone can be an amused tsk tsk or tut tut or a reading of the riot act, as you please, because it’s your house and a commenter is a guest here: you can make the rules and enforce them anyway you like. Bad mannered, boorish visitors don’t need to be coddled or indulged.
Even though most in the blogosphere aren’t being paid for their efforts, and there is anonymity, there should still be standards.
What is revealing Frank/Stacey/etc going to accomplish? Now, revising that question, what is revealing Frank/Stacey/etc going to accomplish in the long run?
Leave a Comment