• Thu
  • Dec 18, 2014
  • Updated: 8:11pm
PUBLISHED : Tuesday, 01 October, 2013, 12:00am
UPDATED : Monday, 30 September, 2013, 10:51pm

Stop giving trolls the cover of online anonymity

Peter Kammerer says if anonymity has allowed some internet users to abuse others as they please, it's time to remove the cover

There was a time when trawling through the comments section to stories in this publication and others was a source of enlightenment, sometimes amusement. Not any more. The amount of hatred, animosity, snobbishness and downright rudeness has put me off even bothering. It's a pity because such forums are an excellent source for a new angle to a discussion while gauging sentiment to issues.

Comments on my colleague Alex Lo's daily My Take column were one of the reasons for my turnaround. His position on issues is not always the same as mine, but that is not cause to greet him each day with slurs, scowls and threats. I suspect he enjoys reading them, but I now no longer do; each day, it seems the same people who long ago made clear their beliefs and politics retread the same well-worn themes. Generally, their comments have nothing to do with what Alex has written.

What turned me was a comment to a restaurant review in which one commenter had taken exception to the view of another on the chicken dish served. A sexual reference was used, as well as an attack on the mother of the poster, a racial slur and a final, "I hope you die of cancer". Poultry has never had this effect on me, but online, with some people, it apparently evokes the most hot-headed anger. Anyway, so jaw-dropping was the pointlessness of this uninvited outrage that I have since given scant regard to that "comment" link or button at the end of articles and posts.

I am not the only one. An increasing number of online sites are shutting down their comments section, the latest being Popular Science magazine. Trolls and spambots have got in the way of the lively, intellectual online debate it strives to foster, its editors explained last week in making the announcement. It's a pity, as learned discussion is vital to important matters like science and technology.

But that will never happen unless people respect the decorum required of everyday life in the online world. It seems that, as soon as they log in, they transform from decent, upstanding members of society to rude, narrow-minded individuals. They behave in ways they wouldn't dare face-to-face. Such unreasonable behaviour has little to do with online freedoms, though; it's all about anonymity.

This is where mainland authorities have got it right with the internet. While their censorship is abhorrent, their requirement that people register for online services and sites with real names takes a significant step towards making commenters think twice before posting.

Aggressive moderating is time-consuming and impractical for sites with large amounts of content. Only a rare few have highly intellectual readers. So it's best to require that people cannot hide behind handles and nicknames.

I'm all for forums where all-comers can have their say, if they like. But personal attacks, snarky remarks and the general ugliness of comments sections, Twitter and the like add nothing to understanding or conversations. On the internet, you don't have to show your face if you don't want to, but you should at least be willing to reveal who you are.

Peter Kammerer is a senior writer at the Post


For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive



This article is now closed to comments

Many web sites offer anonymous comments sections yet manage to keep trolling in check despite having 100s of times the traffic of SCMP -- take Reddit or Slashdot for example.

The main problem is not anonymity but SCMP's primitive comment functionality. Other sites offer sophisticated user-directed moderation capabilities, and posts that are flagged/downvoted by a significant number of users are hidden by default. SCMP, on the other hand, can't even seem to get the pagination functionality in the comments section to work properly. There are legitimate reasons for commenters to want to remain anonymous -- posting opinions that would not sit well with our employers for example.

The other problem is that Alex is simply a terrible columnist. I have stopped reading his columns but some people just lack self control.
Well said. Another issue is that the SCMP gives commenters no option to edit or delete comments after they are posted for >10 minutes. If you'd like me to post comments with full disclosure of my identity, then I also want to be able to exercise control over that content, and for example be able to delete it permanently after 10 days, once the discussion has died down or the issue is just not current anymore. As it stands, none of this is remotely possible on the SCMP website.

Like honkiepanky, I have no desire to be unexpectedly confronted by an employer or other party in 2035 with something I might have said in 2013, rightly or wrongly, perhaps in the heat of a moment, or in a certain context that may or may not preserved. That is the difference between real life and the internet Mr Kammerer. When we speak in a bar, or over dinner, our conversations are not recorded, indexed and made searchable for eternity.
I can't agree more with PK. Looking forward for more in exchanging ideas and information to come.
BTW, johnyuan is John Yuan -- my real name.
It is a possibility. I see your point. There are pragmatic reasons to hide one’s identity especially for a small city like Hong Kong.
Perhaps it is the culture and value that motivate one to use real name in expressing a comment importantly to mean one stands by it. Right or wrong is secondary important.
Considering one must be a paying subscriber to this site to comment (am I right?), I think that would give subscribing commenters certain extra "rights" no?
Personally, I think the numbers of characters per comment needs to be limited as well, as a few people here begin to soapbox, pontificate, and spiral into meaningless babble.
Some comments are censured? or not posted or posted and then deleted after several minutes. SCMP although reserving its rights to do so should state, for the information of the particular commentator, the reason for such removal, and by whom.
Might force some people to think out clearly what they want to convey in a concise manner and not babbling on in unbearable length like one particular famous "contributor" on these pages.
And I love your "if you don't like it then leave" response. So indicative of those with nothing constructive to add.
Sure your given name is "john...." Probably is Zidong.


SCMP.com Account