The other day, I had to disapprove two comments, posted by the same writer, because in an attempt to defend his own views he took to calling two co-commenters names. That brings the total number of comments I’ve disapproved to maybe four or five, all of them (at least in my view) bearing great offense not to me or Manolo personally but to our fellow readers.
The disapproved comments were atypical; by and large, as can be seen from a simple review of the hundreds of comments we’ve already logged, commenters or (my preference) co-bloggers have been generally civil. Oh, to be sure, there is much sarcasm to go around, and insults have been exchanged, but subtly.
While there is little evidence that we have actually succeeded in convincing others (much of our exchange consists of opinion firmly stated and, when challenged, even more firmly restated), we have managed to keep talking. The comments of a recent regular poster, completely cynical about all politicians and even the political enterprise itself, have probably tested the patience of other commenters. And yet the discussion continues. That, I would like to think, is no mean feat; merely keeping this small part of the public square open is already a good thing.
The limits of our virtual public square, however, are considerable. In a real plaza, we can hold forth on our political or other views—-and our audience, plus the occasional passerby, can see our facial expressions, our sometimes unconscious gestures, our body language. See and appreciate. A smile or even an apologetic look can excuse a direct insult; a ridiculous argument can be demolished with a hearty laugh. There are many things we can get away with, in face to face conversation, simply because so-called non-verbal clues are processed too.
Much of this “background” is lost in virtual forums like ours. (Heck, we don’t even have bottles of beer or cups of coffee to argue with.) This, in part, explains why there is so much incivility in Internet forums. (Thankfully, it bears repeating, not so much in ours.) Some people can be discourteous online because other communication clues they take for granted (the twinkle in the eye, when a well-argued line issues from our mouth; the nodding-in-agreement of others in the audience, which encourages us to pursue an argument) are missing.
Of course, other reasons exist for the incivility. The following links suggest some of them.
Butch Dalisay, the UP professor who spreads the gospel of Apple when he is not writing some of the country’s best fiction, posted “an anti-rant rant” in his blog last week. Apparently, the response has been, well, something to rave about.
And sometime ago, Randy David (Inquirer columnist and, yes, another UP professor) led off a column with some choice words on “demonization.” He was talking about “the ethic of discontinuity” that marks our politics in general and our political transitions in particular, but I think his remarks can be applied to much of public discourse as well: Too many of us have the tendency to demonize the other side’s argument, or the other side itself.
Angels, and demons. If we can get beyond these frames of reference, we may actually get somewhere.
Now, all that remains to be said is: What do you guys think about including politicians’ statements in our forum? We have one pending comment from “Team Gordon.” (Hey, they read us!) I don’t know whether we should post it. What do you think?
- October 2009 (4)
- September 2009 (3)
- August 2009 (3)
- July 2009 (1)
- June 2009 (6)
- May 2009 (11)
- April 2009 (6)
- March 2009 (5)
- February 2009 (7)
- January 2009 (11)
- December 2008 (7)
- November 2008 (14)
- October 2008 (8)
- September 2008 (3)
- August 2008 (10)
- July 2008 (1)
- June 2008 (4)
- May 2008 (2)
- April 2008 (3)
- December 2007 (5)
- November 2007 (5)
- October 2007 (8)
- September 2007 (13)
- August 2007 (6)
- July 2007 (14)
- June 2007 (5)
- May 2007 (24)
- April 2007 (23)
- March 2007 (18)
- Foreign affairs (17)
- May 2007 elections (36)
- May 2010 elections (5)
- Media matters (22)
- Philippine politics (131)
- Religious issues (13)
- Rule of law (13)
- Terrorism (7)
- test (1)
- Uncategorized (41)
- US relations (16)
18 Feedbacks on "Angels and demons"
Lea Hetherington
What I would like to say, is that, any comment that it is very uncivilized or unproffessional should not be posted.
Kabayan
Hi John,
It would be interesting to view politician’s comments, however the question is should there be a separate thread or even a whole category be allocated to political personalities? I would understand it if it were election time but the next one (if there will be a next one) is still quite far-off.
Allowing political discussions with actual politicians online would likely generate and awful lot of comments (maybe even insults?) which may render the blogs haywire.
Another concern is, who judges which politicians or wannabee politicians be allowed to have a nice thread dedicated to him/her? A possible remedy to this would be to make the blog answers be based upon relevant issues rather than personalities. In other words, NO dedicated thread per politician.
But again if this were the case, it might be far more simpler for them to register to you ,the editor, the politician’s “Team” (like Team Gordon for example) and post their view on the issues involved. The purpose of the “registration” is to avoid copycats out to sabotage the name of the politician.
To know how the politicians stand on issues, their reasons for their views and how they practically act on the issue and actual services (not lip-talk); would be better than outright campaigning that their Politico is good.
Why not John, just long as their comments and answers are based on relevant issues currently posted in this forum rather than grandstanding on how good they are.
You can always cease this privilege or discontinue this experiment if the result does not conform to the forum principles you have set out to do or if things get out of hand. We don’t want this to end up like a politician’s tabloid after all.
INQUIRER.net Blogs » Steve McQueen, the long tail, angels and demons, and pre-need plans
[…] Nery blogs about angels and demons in […]
Bert
Post them, John! And let us bloggers here clobber ‘em with kisses, or stones.
MC_90
I think I will have to disagree, I dont think this is the right forum where politicians starts posting their comments or their position or their platapormas…and I dont think they are really the ones writing…i think its their crazy lawyers or advisers doing it…
ahhh what the heck….post em…and like what Bert said, lets clobber them with kisses or stones….
hiram1104
Yes John, we are in a democracy. Everybody has to right to express his opinion on any issues at hand.
OFW in Afghanistan
The fact that they read us, is very very good news indeed! Why not, John? Let us welcome them in the forum. I have been waiting for this to happen. I knew it will happen one day. Exchange of views with politicians is not bad at all. Who knows, we might be able to influence the way they think and act.
We can always ignore them if they do not make sense at all. I think we have lots of intelligent bloggers…we can always challenge, support, agree, disagree…or just as Bert is saying…clobber them with kisses or stones. Haha!
clipmaster
post them all…….
Tim de la Paz
I don’t know where else to post this, and I apologize if this is not the right thread.
But, will somebody please decipher this English ?
No offense and no disrespect, but I just couldn’t understand what the writer is trying to say:
“But Foreign Affairs Undersecretary fir Migrant Workers’ Affairs Esteban Conejos, whose office has been working on the cases of these OFWs since January last year, said the bad news is not so bad because the child of the two OFWs’ murder victim has still not reached the age of majority, by which time she may be able to forgive the convicts and spare their lives.
“.
Here’s the link:
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/news/news/view_article.php?article_id=83221
And here’s the title of the article:
17 death sentences on OFWs commuted
Thank you.
Tim de la Paz
Did the writer mean:
okey. wala tayong magagawa sa ngayon dahil bata pa iyong anak ng pinatay ng dalawang ito at wala pang personalidad na magpatawad o hindi, kaya hindi na rin gaanong masyadong masamang balita kahit mamatay pa rin iyong dalawa ?
I’m not being insensitive to the condemned OFWs and their loved ones, but for the life of me the above is the only paraphrase/translation I could think of. .
Ms Ott
Our response to what one would like to presume as appropirate or inappropriate will determine the flow of discussion. No need for rules, shoulds or must and/or must not or should not or , my way, his way, your way… oh, well.
Fred S.
Angels and Demons will always be around. It all depends on which side of the fence you are in. As a matter of fact there are so many demons that present themselves as angels. That is the reason why they fool a lot of people. And when people realize it, it is always too late!
That is exactly what happened to Adam and Eve! Unfortunately this is also happening to the Filipino people on a daily basis. They are used, abused and taken advantaged of by wolves disguised in sheeps clothing!
abe
i believe in freedom of press.
Bert
Hi, clipmaster! Now we see you, now we don’t, now we see you again. Where have you been? I’m glad you are back.
Bert
Hi clipmaster again. How’s your friend, Salina?
OFW in Afghanistan
Angels and demons…we need them in our midst. Thanks to demons we are able to appreciate angels. Thanks to angels, we are able to despise demons. Just post their views, John!
I was in China for quite a time and it amazes me how they focus on science and technology. This is I think also true for India. In the Philippines, who among these politicians with pork and barrel to speak of have invested their porks and interests in science and technology. Nada.
I have experienced tourism in Thailand, India and China. These countries are so proud their culture and their arts. These are neatly woven in their tourism strategy. In the Philippines, which politicians support our tourism strategy? Nada.
What do these politicians support? Infrastructure, bridges, basketball courts, roads, etc. Why? Because this is where the money is.
As Filipinos, I think we should be capable of analyzing the projects of the people we voted for. Why are they supporting these projects? For whose good? It will be good to have a yearly account of the projects for which the pork barrel of these politicians have been allocated for. Our analysis should lead us to some understanding of what these politicians stand for. I do not think that this is a difficult thing to do.
Mlq and John, can you do this for us at the end of the year? If we do this, then the conversations with the politicians would be much more informed. What do you think?
Devilsadvc8
No politicians should be allowed to post simply bec they won’t really be the ones posting anyway. it will be their PR writers, hacks, and supporters.
as for censoring, i am only for it when the poster is already disrupting intelligent discourse and merely posting curses and rants w/o any constructive idea to contribute. and then, ONLY when that poster has been warned that future behavior will not be tolerated. only when the poster persists in remaining uncivil should we take the last measure which is censorship.
we wouldn’t want our website now to degenerate into flame sites like others are now, are we?
Current » Gordon: Flash or flush
[…] months ago, I asked you if we should post a comment from a politician or a political group. Somebody had written what […]
Please Leave a Comment!