Opinion : The queen and the dog, and Vinton Today’s comment policy

An area politician walked by me at a recent baseball game, gave me an understanding smile and patted me on the back.

I laughed, because I knew what he was saying.

He was identifying with the controversy that had many people criticizing the comment policy of Vinton Today.

Two Views

Many people have shared their opinion on our comment policy.

Today, I want to specifically discuss two of the comments we received.

There are two people who agree that our comment policy alone makes Vinton Today –as much as they used to like it – absolutely no good as a news source.

Except for one thing: These two gentlemen disagree as strongly as they could with each other.

I will let you read each of the comments for yourself, in the words of the man writing them:

First, read Comment 1 on VT Comments:

“…comments with no names and comments with direct insults are WRONG and for me erases all the good that this web site does - BAD BAD POLICY all the way around...”

Now, look at Comment 2 on VT Comments:

“Vinton Today was a reputable news site... and then they forced you to put your name behind everything! I will put my name behind every comment as long as you are willing to put the names of every source behind your stories! You don't have to disclose, why should I have to!?"

So, there you have it. By allowing comments with no names, we are erasing all of the good our web site does. By not allowing them, we are no longer a reputable news site.

I don’t mind the complaints, or the criticism. To me, it simply means that those who have strong opinions about the issue care about Vinton Today and feel like they want to be part of what we do. That’s good.

Of course, having readers with opinions that are strongly opposed to each other means that whatever we decide about our comment policy is going to disappoint someone.

What to do about comments has always been a question for us; even from the very beginning we have debated several options, from letting anyone say anything, to allowing no comments at all.

Two more views

There are good reasons for considering each possible policy.

Allowing all comments (except for those that are vulgar or profane, which we would never approve) gets more people involved in the stories. More people read them, if only to see their comment or the replies to their comments. There are also people, including a well-respected local businessman, who feel that they have something important to say, but fear that saying it could jeopardize their friendships or business.

But a former public official disagrees with the businessman. This guy was himself the target of anonymous comments years ago. He pointed out that allowing anonymous comments, especially those that criticize someone, makes it harder for those being criticized to understand the purpose of the comment. He said requiring names makes public debate better, because it allows everyone who reads the comment to understand who and where it is coming from.

Both of these men have a point.

But it would be impossible to create a policy that both of them could agree on.

Allowing no comments would make my job easier. But then we would lose a part of the connection that readers feel.

Also, requiring full names would mean that many good comments -- positive things that people say  -- would get left out. We have often published congratulatory comments by people who identified themselves by only a first name, or by Aunt or Mrs. Somebody. I did publish a few of those comments last year, after an earlier debate about full names on comments.

And yes, some people complained because we published comments that did not include full names, even those comments were positive and congratulatory. Naturally.

After considering the various positions and comments about our comments policy, we at Vinton Today have decided to implement a new technology that permits only those who give a first and last name along with their email address (which won't be shown) to submit a comment. Comments submitted with those spaces empty will be sent to the Internet version of the dead letter box, never to be seen again. We still will review comments and like everyone else who has a web site we have the right to publish or not publish any comment. We still do have a place on our web site where people can send story ideas (or of course, comments) anonymously. Those comments, however, will not appear on the web site – only in our email inbox.

The Queen and the Dog

But in addition to explaining our new policy and technology, I also want to briefly discuss the attitude and philosophy of the commentators as well as those who are the subject of those comments.

First, I have noticed that there are a lot of people who read a story or hear a news broadcast and their first reaction is to comment, to speak out, to pass it on. Me, I prefer the approach of those who read a story and try to find out more about what happened before expressing an opinion.

Second, I have a favorite story about comments. I have shared this at times with people who were being criticized for whatever reason.

It involves, ironically: A dog.

When I was a kid, I read somewhere – Reader’s Digest, I think although I have not found it lately – about an incident involving the Queen of England, and a dog.

“A dog barked at the Queen today,” observed a writer from the London Times. “The Queen did not bark back.”