The Cavalier Daily
Serving the University Community Since 1890

Comment convictions

Rather than constructive and intellectual debates, comment wars online have turned into reactionary and stupid

Lauren Caldwell's editorial cartoon that ran in The Cavalier Daily last Monday was an example of found commentary. All Caldwell had to do to make an effective comment on some of The Cavalier Daily's readers was to quote those readers' online comments.

Writer and commentator Molly Ivins used to counsel young journalists to avoid the cynical attitude that the people - as in "we, the people" - are stupid. She also counseled those journalists that it would be easier to do that if they never read the letters to the editor. That seems to be at least doubly true of online comments.

I don't read every comment on every article, letter, column and editorial, but I read a bit. And it can be a bit depressing. It's not just that the most commented-on articles seem to be the least substantial. (Dan Stalcup's column about rooting for Virginia Tech not only generated a follow-up Stalcup column, but the two columns begot 376 comments at cavalierdaily.com.) It's not just that those comments seem to veer off into unrelated vitriol. It's not just that so many online commentors seem more interested in parrying other commentors' next comments - often to the point of missing the point of whatever was said before. It's not just that a lot of those comments from people arguing about whose school is more academically superior suggests that neither school is putting much emphasis on spelling, grammar or critical thinking. But all of those things rolled together have a significant weight.

On the other hand, I'm encouraged by what I've seen in connection with a proposal to add a community appeals option to the honor system. Graduate Arts & Sciences Representative Alexander Cohen made the proposal, which would let anyone convicted of an honor violation "have the right to have the facts of his case placed before the community and have his conviction overturned if, in the judgment of the community, he should have not [been] convicted." Both the article reporting the proposal and the editorial commenting on it have generated a largely reasoned and reasonable discussion.

There are some cheap shots grounded in something besides reason even among these comments, but they are outnumbered by what seem to be serious, considered comments.

It's early in the process. The story and the editorial are both about a week old, and much of that week was taken up by Thanksgiving break, so more people may become more engaged in this debate. But it's still a little disconcerting that an associate sports editor cheering for the Hokies and sartorial choices in the student section would get so much more reaction than a debate about the honor code and how it should be enforced.

Maybe that's somehow related to another recent Cavalier Daily editorial, the one about student leadership and self-governance.

"Students are encouraged to embrace the concept of self-governance from the moment they arrive on Grounds," that one began. "It is an ideal that is purportedly at the heart of the University's mission. Although the institution's administration is composed of adults, it is the students - particularly undergraduates - who are supposed to be the underlying force for change. In essence, students, not administrators, are meant to guide the University's path. ... Tasks like passing commemorative resolutions and adjusting by-laws are not without merit, but they do not invoke the full force of self-governance. Students will generally admire one of their peers for leading a prominent organization on Grounds, but those accolades are fleeting. In time, only truly exceptional effort and nerve will be remembered."

No one's commented on that one yet.

Tim Thorton is The Cavalier Daily's ombudsman. His column usually appears on Mondays.

Local Savings

Comments

Puzzles
Hoos Spelling
Latest Video

Latest Podcast