Take a look at the user comment area attached to today’s Press article headlined Teen worker dies in accident at Hauser corn maze. The screen capture above is one of the “user comments”.
Is it appropriate for a Press staff member to post pseudonymously on one of the skewspaper’s own news articles?
It immediately raises very reasonable questions: How many other “users” are also Press staff members who comment pseudonymously to push the skewspaper’s agenda on its own news stories? If a Press staff member wants to answer a “user” comment or clarify something in a news story, why not use his or her true name above the staff identifier? How accepted is this practice among our region’s news media who allow online users to post comments on news stories?
Very interesting.
Comment by LTR — October 13, 2014 @ 7:56 am
How many post here pseudonymously? I am a believer that anyone that has something to say or a question to ask should have the fortitude to put their name on it otherwise it is just graffiti.
Comment by Mike Teague — October 13, 2014 @ 8:31 am
Mike Teague,
The effect of allowing pseudonymous comments can differ between noncommercial websites (such as OpenCdA) which does not sell ads or space and a commercial website that does sell ads or space. If the commercial website’s owner includes the number of online comments or unique identifiers in calculating its advertising rates, then encouraging or allowing the employees or hiring contractors to post pseudonymously in order to inflate the number of views and thereby justify higher ad rates would be unethical and possibly even illegal.
Comment by Bill — October 13, 2014 @ 9:08 am
The press can make any editorial comments they want, they have all the ink they want to use: to use the employees to continue their message is not right and should be forbidden.
Just a comparison * If a company is having a give a way, no employees and or family are allowed to enter. CONFLICT OF INTEREST????????
Comment by Sharon Culbreth — October 13, 2014 @ 10:33 am
Bill,
I have to wonder: Are “jmowreader” and “jmowreader1” the same person? If they are and jmowreader is CDA Press Staff then I find it appalling, but not surprising. With that, I wouldn’t be surprised that D. Olivera has several pseudonyms like so many others I am aware of who post in the Spokesman-Review so they can play devils advocate and provocateur.
As you mentioned above, it’s all about the number of visits and number of comments that equate to the price of advertising charged by online media sources. If there are no in-house rules for pumping the numbers the numbers will get pumped. But then at the same time how would the Press or S-R (or advertiser) even know if the numbers were being inflated by their own self-serving employees?
Comment by Old Dog — October 13, 2014 @ 6:54 pm
Old Dog,
When Dan Gookin, Mary Souza, and I started OpenCdA a few years ago, we discussed several things. We agreed that we would not keep track of how many “hits” any particular post or comment received. We agreed with Dan that we should not be “hit whores.”
We also discussed whether we should register ourselves with pseudonyms and then use those to stimulate conversation. We also agreed that would be inappropriate, that the three of us should not say something we would not put our own names on. We understood why some commenters would, so we did agree to require that persons wanting to register so they could comment should at least be willing to provide a working email address.
Your questioning if jmowreader and jmowreader1 are the same person is certainly a valid one, particularly if they are and if the person is a CdA Press staff member. Then again, I seriously doubt that there are too many people who even remotely consider the Coeur d’Alene Press to be anything other than the propaganda arm for the Hagdone Corporation’s business interests, let alone a serious daily newspaper. As for The Spokesman-Review, same song under a different record label.
Comment by Bill — October 13, 2014 @ 7:38 pm