My Thoughts On Comments

Comment threads on websites allow anyone to get on their soapbox and share their thoughts about topics. These opinions range from credible and coherent to ridiculous and badly in need of spellcheck. Piggybacking on my last "Controversy" post, I will be analyzing comments found on another Sigma Alpha Epsilon racism article.

Questions

1.  Does this commenter seem to be expressing fear/anxiety about something or does s/he seem to be expressing a fantasy/wish about something? How can you tell?
2.  What kinds of beliefs and values do you think this commenter holds? What are you basing this on?
3.  For the 2 credible comments only: Why does this commenter came across as reasonable to you?
4.  For the 2 comments that lack credibility only: Why does this commenter come across as lacking credibility or trustworthiness for you?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Washington Post

 1. Anitabe seems to have fear about the extent of racism in the fraternity system and in society as a whole. His/her statement that "things get ugly when they start showing their true colors" assumes that there is a hidden culture of racism that has been uncovered by that chapter's drunken antics.

2. The commenter seems to value equality and the truth very highly. He/she also seems to believe in straightforward reality, as he/she calls out people who are "naive and post-racialists."

4. This comment lacks credibility because it makes the unfortunate assumption that all black people avoid drunk whites all the time. This statement overgeneralizes the interactions between the two races; it is unfair to say that whites and blacks act in this manner in every situation. It also dissolves into an ad hominem attack at the end, making the comment even more untrustworthy.

Washington Post

1. The statement that "blacks go out of their way to avoid whites socially" means that this commenter is either making an awful joke or expressing a fantasy that there is no desire for blacks to interact with anyone white. This is a fantastical comment that can easily be proven false.

2. Tennisfan seems to value stereotypes over the truth and diversity. He/she expresses a belief in race separations and a widespread disdain of whites among blacks.

4. This comment lacks credibility because of the gross generalizations that make up over half of the post. It seems as though Tennisfan wants to be the spokesperson for the entire black community. His/her "facts" are not grounded in reality to any extent.

Washington Post

1. MNUSA seems to fear that the fraternity system as a whole fosters bad behaviors. By expressing that he/she doesn't want his/her son to join one, he/she intimates a fear for the integrity and character of the future generations.

2. With the mentions of "immaturity" and "entitlement," MNUSA seems to value good behavior and honest morals in young men. He/she also seems to believe that any institution that goes against these morals is not something worth acknowledging or participating in.

3. Due to a lack of generalizations and an avoidance of condemning language, MNUSA's comment seems reasonable to me. The commenter shares valid opinions that are based on the evidence shown in the article and the antics of fraternities that have blanketed the news.

Washington Post

 1. The fear apparent in SisuInSF's comment is that fraternity members and alumni are receiving undue criticism and disdain because of the actions of a few. He/she seems to worry about the reputation of the Greek system as a whole, as there are many brothers that stand to lose a lot if the whole Greek system is being condemned.

2. SisuInSF seems to value justice and the rights of the individual. It is apparent that he/she believes in the avoidance of group judgement and the ability of any individual to make their own decisions.

3. This commenter appeared reasonable due to his logical comparisons and calm manner with which he approaches the opinions of others. Had he resorted to anger and name-calling, he would not have been so trustworthy. He also brings up the self-righteous punishment of those who don't agree, which is something that is scorned in free and civil society.


Reflection:
It was interesting to read Thomas and Addie's thoughts on comments as they wrote about the same controversy. Their's was a hot button issue so many of the comments were emotionally-driven and lacking credibility. Browsing the comment threads, I found that people's opinions on the issue were as far and wide as the different methods with which they stated them. The most effective on either side, however, were those that avoided anger, name calling, and broad generalizations.