Cruelty boundless on Internet

When a California woman recently gave birth to a healthy baby just two days after learning she was pregnant, the sudden change to her life was challenging enough. What April Branum definitely didn’t need was a deluge of nasty Internet comments.

Postings on message boards made cracks about Miss Branum’s weight (about 400 pounds — one reason she says didn’t realize sooner she was pregnant). They also analyzed her housekeeping ability, based on a photo of her home. And they called her names. “A pig is a pig,” one person wrote. Another suggested that she “go on the show ‘The Biggest Loser.’ ”

“The thing that bothered me most was, people assumed because I am overweight, I’m going to be a bad mom,” Miss Branum says. “And that is not one little bit true.”

It was yet another example of how the Internet — and the anonymity it affords — has given a public stage to people’s basest thoughts, ones that in earlier eras likely never would have traveled past the watercooler, the kitchen table or the next barstool.

Such incidents — and there are countless examples across cyberspace — also raise the question: Is there anything to be done about it? Or is a decline in civil discourse simply the price we pay for the advance of technology?

“The Internet really amplifies everything,” says Jeffrey Cole, of the Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Southern California. “We have a lot of opinions out there. All of a sudden there’s a place we can go to share them.” Add to that the freedom that anonymity provides, he says, and it “can lead to a rowdy Wild West situation, with no one to filter it.”

“It’s all things said reflexively, without thinking,” says Mr. Cole, who tracks the political and social impact of the Internet as director of Annenberg’s Center for the Digital Future.

“My guess is that if you went back to these people, a lot of them would have second thoughts.”

There are examples everywhere of anonymous comments that cause harm. On even the most innocuous sites — a parenting message board, for example — anonymity often leads to the type of response that would hardly be likely if names were attached.

“People post insults on here left and right,” one person wrote last week on the New York edition of urbanbaby.com, a networking site for new mothers. “It seems the common word these posts have is ‘fat.’ Just because someone is overweight, fat, thick, whatever you call us, doesn’t mean we are ugly, lazy or insecure … So stop the childish remarks.”

News organizations, struggling to find ways to keep their readers involved in an increasingly digital and interactive world, are trying to strike the right balance.

Miss Branum’s case fueled debate at the Orange County Register, whose Web site had only recently added a public comment section after news stories. OCRegister.com deputy editor Jeff Light says the site has modified its message board, only six weeks old, in response to staff concerns about inappropriate posts. Now, among other changes, language is more specific about what the site expects from those who post, and how a comment can be deleted.

Ideally, Mr. Light says, it’s the users, not the site’s operators, who should determine what is discussed, and how. “The comment area is not a journalistic space,” he says. “The point is for people to react freely.”

Yahoo News took down its message boards completely in December, with the goal of finding a new system that doesn’t let a small group of vocal users dominate the discourse. “Our hope is to raise the value of the conversation,” says Yahoo spokesman Brian Nelson.

Harm can be much greater when people are singled out by name on the Web; such attacks can hurt someone’s career or home life. One entrepreneur is trying to help people recover from such attacks with a company he started last year: ReputationDefender.

Story Continues →