Who owns blog comments?
Don’t fence me in
When I was young I was a competitive, rugged individualist. I rejected the ‘parallel thinking’ and ‘lateral thinking’ approaches that I was naturally inclined towards using. My family members, school teachers and employers placed a strong reliance on competition, within a structured environment replete with rules and regulations.
I struggled to become a ‘linear’ thinker but I failed time and time again when my shadow self emerged. By the time I was thirty I recognized that I had been a square peg and that no amount of hammering will make my ‘self’ fit into a round hole. I became aware of who I really am and I set myself free.
I edit spelling errors, typos and awkward wording on posts and in forums. I frequently do so more than once because I do not always see clearly. I also edit what I have written when I think I have not expressed myself clearly. I do this because I believe that my words belong to me and, because I believe I have the right to edit or even delete them, until someone else posts into the same post or forum thread. After that occurs IMHO any changes ought to be made in follow-up comments made to the same thread so the conversation in the thread is not disjointed.
How many times have you heard this?
If you’re not prepared to let it stand, why did you post/publish/say it in the first place?
My response is that if I am to be burdened with the rule of remaining silent, until after I have internally processed information, and taken a position on any given issue then, you will never experience the best of me. This is why.
Linear thinkers
(1) In almost any group there are those who firmly believe that the words they just uttered or typed are set in stone. They contend that, once words are uttered and recorded those words belong to “the community” and should not be edited or deleted.
They contend:
(a) We are responsible for our words, therefore, one should always think before speaking.
(b) And, one should always be mindful of the effects that their words may have on others.
Who would beg to differ with these statements they use to buttress their position? Well, I would. Statistically speaking, in almost any group the majority will be programmed from infancy onward to be linear thinkers and will heartily agree with the quote above and the two buttressing statements as well. Moreover, as they do constitute a majority, and as they are doing what they have always been told to do, linear thinkers feel they are entitled to insist (majority rule) that everyone else ought to conform to their way of thinking and their code of behaviour. They are people who function well in structured environments where rules and regulations prevail.
Free thinkers (lateral and parallel thinkers)
(2) Although I can be extremely focused and organized, my best ideas never arise from participating in structured processes or working in a structured environment. I am a free thinker. My attitudes and opinions are in a state of flux. In keeping with this, I state in my blog’s disclaimer the following:
“My views of five years or five minutes ago do not necessarily reflect my views right now. My thoughts, opinions and viewpoints will continue change as I learn more and develop a deeper understanding of the things I am writing about. I consider this a necessary consequence of having an open mind. I reserve the right to allow my viewpoints to evolve and to change my thoughts, viewpoints and opinions over time without assigning any reason for such changes.”
Being able to communicate freely and to shape and re-shape my points of view, while I am processing them in conversation with others is my comfort zone. When my right to do as I am naturally inclined to do (free thinking, parallel thinking, lateral thinking) is not recognized, I do not waste my time and energy on converting the majority, I head for the door.
I create from chaos
(3) I’m an artist. I do not sketch and measure and plan the execution of my art in advance of its creation. I form my art ‘on the canvas’, so to speak. I do not actually begin to create ‘art’ until I commence restructuring the chaos that happens when I am painting spontaneously. Likewise, I form my opinions during the process of discussing things with others.
I require the kind of freedom to communicate in blog and forum commentary as a devil’s advocate, without necessarily stating that in advance. I require the kind of freedom to be able to completely switch position from one side of an issue to it’s polar opposite and back again, without being chastised for being ‘odd’ or ‘bad’ for doing so.
Where’s your head at?
(4) As previously mentioned, the majority in any society are linear thinkers. Well, have you stopped to consider that we live in a world where ‘discussion’ of our problems is not solution orientated. Almost every conversation we engage in whether ‘light’ or ‘heavy’ becomes an adversarial process or a mock adversarial process. What people bring to the process is a fixed mindset. In other words, they are burdened with prejudice and focused on ‘winning’. In his book ‘Parallel Thinking’ (published by Viking, London and Penguin Books, London), author, Edward DeBono observes:
“Adversarial thinking completely lacks a constructive, creative or design element. It was intended only to discover the ‘truth’ not to build anything.
Parallel thinking is best understood in contrast to traditional argument or adversarial thinking.
With the traditional argument or adversarial thinking each side takes a different position and then seeks to attack the other side. Each side seeks to prove that the other side is wrong. This is the type of thinking established by the Greek Gang of Three (Socrates, Plato and Aristotle) two thousand four hundred years ago.Adversarial thinking completely lacks a constructive, creative or design element. It was intended only to discover the ‘truth’ not to build anything.
With ‘parallel thinking’ both sides (or all parties are thinking in parallel in the same direction. There is co-operative and co-ordinated thinking. The direction itself can be changed in order to give a full scan of the situation. But at every moment each thinker is thinking in parallel with all the other thinkers. There does not have to be agreement. Statements or thoughts which are indeed contradictory are not argued out but laid down in parallel. In the final stage, the way forward is ‘designed’ from the parallel thoughts that have been laid out.
A simple and practical way of carrying out ‘parallel thinking’ is the Six HatsTM method which is now being used widely around the world both because it speeds up thinking and also because it is so much more constructive then traditional argument thinking. ” Information on Lateral Thinking and Six HatsTM methods are available on this website.
Who owns blog comments?
(5) Copyright protection arguably arises when the comment author enters text into the comment field – even before he/she clicks the ’submit’ button and possession transfers to the recipient blogger.
Let me explain. Suppose you write blog comments in the following way:
- You craft the perfect two sentence blog comment in your head.
- You manually write your perfect two sentences down on a scrap of paper.
- You type the sentences into the comment box on a blog.
- You hit the “submit’ button and publish the comment.
In the scenario, copyright protection arises at step 2. This is the moment at which the work is fixed in a tangible medium — when ink hits the paper. See US copyright code.
Where do you stand on the issue?
I once wrote a comment on a “citizen journalist” blog by someone who demonstrated that he couldn’t spell or do basic research. I pointed out his errors and instead of thanking me, he changed the comments to make me look foolish. Really, what are you going to do to counter that? It’s like wrestling with a pig. All you do is get dirty, and the pig loves it. Best just not to comment there again.
Wait, can I edit my comment, I just noticed some typos!
Sure, and didn’t I take this literally? I deleted your comment and I emailed it back to you for editing as requested. When you have cleaned it up please post it again.
Setting aside the unethical practices of bloggers who edit comments so they can make those who post them sound stupid or silly or even for the purpose of artificially creating a flamewar, the concept of any blogger owning my comments runs against my grain. I’m like you. Once a blogger has edited my comment without me requesting that this be done – I never return to that blog again.
This subject came up on the wp.com forum some months ago now. It was pointed out there that other blog platforms do allow the editing and even deletion of comments by the person who made them. What appears where the comment was is a message supplied by the software that states words to the effect of either edited or deleted by original posting party and the date and time this was done.
I’m okay with that. How about you?
Clearly there are those out there with no real sense of ethics who will change the comments of another when they do not like what they have said, or when the comment contradicts what the blogger has said. That is an action clearly based in fear. I have no time for people like that.
I too edit people’s comments sometimes for typos, but for the most part, I allow comments made on my blog to stand as they are. I’ve had a few people ask me to change a typo or something in a comment, and as long as it does not substantially alter the meaning of a comment, I will do it.
I am uncomfortable with hard and fast rules (although I have comment guidelines on my blog), and prefer to follow my inner guidance and feelings. Fortunately, the quality of comments on my blog has been very high and I have not had to wrestle with any pesky dilemmas.
I’ll continue to deal with comments on my blog on a case-by-case basis.
I too believe that I own the comment I write. But suppose I have made a comment on another blog and if I am quoting it, I give a link to that blog.
I think that’s fair, but this kind of thing is rare.
However if I have to ever point out a mistake to some writer, I would prefer to do it by email as it can embarrass the writer. Not that I have had similar consideration! I regularly get comments about the mistakes that I have made. People can be very insulting and rude, but as long as they don’t use bad words, and as long as they are not lying, I let their comment stand.
There’s an interesting extension to this. If the blog owner owns the comments on their blog then are they in any way vulnerable to being held legally accountable for the comments that they allow to remain posted on their blog?
I will never allow my blog to become a platform for commentators to defame and inflame one another. In the case of receiving a comment that contains nothing but racist, obscene, defamatory and inflammatory statements I will not approve it. I will delete it.
Suppose someone submits a comment that contains racist, defamatory commentary obviously aimed at someone who has previously commented on your blog post, as well as, subject matter that does address the subject matter in the original post.
Rather than approving a comment that contains commentary that is or may be legally actionable on my blog, I would post only the part of the comment that dealt with the subject matter of my original post, including a notation like this: [ This comment has been edited by the owner of this blog to remove off-topic commentary].
What do you readers say to that?
P.S. I will address each of you and the issues that you raised in comments here in a wrap-up post after I believe that no further comments will be forthcoming.
I’m conflicted about this myself. Personally I feel that any comments submitted to my blog are the intellectual property of the comment author; I won’t edit them unless there’s an obvious typo or the author asks me to correct something without it changing the meaning of the comment. But I do feel responsible for them as well as I’m letting those views be widely read; though I’m not endorsing their views, if someone pointed out a major flaw in someone’s thinking and I had knowingly let it stand, I’d feel compelled to respond myself.
As far as editing goes, the one exception is if a comment is defamatory or hateful; those I delete or edit severely (with a notice). Often they come from new authors and moderating first comments has helped to weed them out. But once I had an author who left a legitimate comment on my blog, and then subsequently started spamming my blog and posting hateful remarks. I ended up having to ban his IP address.
I’ve had a couple of others which have been marginal as well, so I try to take it on a case by case basis. For my own comments (or posts), I don’t like editing them once someone has responded; I wouldn’t want it to seem like I’ve changed the direction of the conversation. But if someone hasn’t responded in the first few minutes then I’ll edit for brevity or to fix errors, but little more than that. I don’t like being able to do something my readers can’t do.
It’s funny, though, that with how long people have been blogging, there’s still never been a consensus on this… even when Tim O’Reilly in his code of conduct suggested that bloggers should take responsibility not just for their own words, but also for the comments on their blogs, many bloggers disagreed (vehemently)… perhaps in the end it comes down to how you define a blog. If you think of it like a journal and all comments stem from the original post, then perhaps they do belong to the owner as he/she generated the conversation. But if a blog is more like a newspaper column and comments are letters to the editor, then publishing the comments sets an example for acceptable discourse. That doesn’t make them the owner’s property, but it does make him/her somewhat responsible for them… if that make sense.
This is timely for me brightfeather. My emotional reaction is that my blog is mine, and therefore I’m responsible for what is on it. Sometimes I feel I have to do mental gymnastics to respond to comments which are way off topic, or those which attempt to diagnose me or my motives. The legal issues are very unclear, at least to me. I read far and wide about this, and I’ve yet to find a clear copyright definition for blog comments.
Additionally, I feel that spam filtering, or deleting rather than allowing a comment is a form of editing too. It is editing I’m more than willing to do, of course, but in choosing to delete a comment I am preventing the commenter from joining the discussion based on any criteria I set. Richard made a good point about bloggers who edit content because they disagree with the commenter, but where do you draw the line? For me, it’s about how the tone and the content of the comment reflects that of the blog.
There seems to be general agreement that defamatory comments are unacceptable. Who, however defines what is considered defamatory? The blog owner, obviously. Many bloggers have a policy which defines exactly what would not be acceptable in this context. I generally find those very depressing to read. I’d prefer to be inclusive rather than limiting, and I’m more inclined to edit or delete comments I feel are NOT inclusive. But, again, how can that be anything other than my own opinion? Additionally, something I consider offensive and prejudiced may be seen by the comment author as just expressing their opinion. All we can do as blog owners is use our best judgment.
I do go back and forth with this, as cj says he does, and also have thought about newspaper editorials and replies to those. A newspaper will often print a disclaimer saying they will edit for length or “content”. What does that mean? What if the “letter-to-the-editor-writer” doesn’t like what they’ve done?
brightfeather, I very much like and appreciate your suggestion of using: “[This comment has been edited by the owner of this blog to remove off-topic commentary].” There is at least one occasion I wish I’d thought of that! The commenter may still question my stance on this, but at least I’ve made a statement. I think it’s a good idea to put such a comment in moderation while emailing the commenter about what I’m doing. Moderating it takes it off the blog while I can examine my emotional reaction to it. We’re all human, and make mistakes (sometimes out of fear) and I’ve found my initial reaction is not necessarily what I’d choose to do if I gave myself time to think it over.
Finally, I believe Lorelle VanFossen has some good suggestions at Blog Herald. I’m considering what I’ve learned here from your post and comments, along with some other reading, to craft a new policy. I thank you much for this thoughtful and intelligent discussion.