9 tips to make comment moderation easier
I’ve written often that comments are useful on news sites, anonymity serves a purpose, and making those things work requires adequate, local moderation. But there’s the hitch: Moderating comments on an active site can be a daunting task. Phillip Smith, whom I follow on Twitter, sent out this today:
Volunteered to cover comment mod on a busy site for a friend on vacation: 26 mins for just one thread. How do people do this? Oy vey!
— Phillip Smith (@phillipadsmith) August 4, 2014
Part of the solution to managing comments involves long-term strategies such as increasing author participation and establishing clear rules. Not so helpful when, like Phillip, you’re thrown into the thick of things. So here are some quick tips from a veteran of the comment zone:
Know the site’s structure. Every commenting platform has quirks. Learn them so you can figure out how to work around them. Are your comments threaded? Do you know what happens if you delete a comment at the start of a thread? Do all the replies disappear, or are they left there, orphaned? When you delete a comment, how quickly does it disappear from the public site?
Know the site’s audience. A big reason that I advocate in-house moderation is that knowledge of your audience’s habits makes moderation easier. A local person will be more aware of the euphemisms most often used to avoid word filters, the code words (on cleveland.com, for example, “East Side” was shorthand for “African-American”), the particular topics that rile users most. The more familiar you are with those things, the quicker you’ll catch on to threads going astray.
Know the site’s users. This takes time, but it’s a big time-saver. The more you see of your site’s comments, the quicker you’ll recognize frequent commenters even if they try to change their IDs. We had one guy, for example, who had something of a fetish about Krav Maga, a self-defense course. An essay about bullying? The solution is Krav Maga. Police were finally getting around to testing years-old rape kits? Those women should have learned Krav Maga. And so on. Nine times out of ten, those comments would throw the switch on the thread, derailing it. We got so familiar with it that the words would leap out at us as we quickly scanned comments, and we would delete his remarks instinctively.
Delete first, reflect later. The biggest errors rookie moderators make are either to be too generous or to waste time mulling over individual comments. Practice meatball moderation. Conversations suffer far more from the ones you let by than from reasonable comments that got caught up in your net.
Target the insults. The Nieman Lab recently summarized a study of comments on a newspaper site. One of the unsurprising findings: The biggest single type of offense was name-calling, found in 14% of all comments on the site. Based on my experience, personal attacks are also the most likely to lead to comment wars. We started out with a list of obscene and scatalogical words commenters couldn’t use about other commenters. Then we expanded that to words such as “stupid.” By the end, we were likely to take down even very elegant insults.
Target key posts early. Once you know your audience, you’ll know what kinds of stories are most likely to draw comment flies. (Your colleagues can help a lot by warning you before they post.) Dive into those posts early and fiercely. The first comments on a post set the tone. If you let a few jerks jump in, rational users will stay away and the rest of the clowns will move in. It’s always harder to clean out a post when it’s been festering for an hour or more.
Don’t read everything. Reading every word of every comment is another rookie mistake. There’s no time — and it’s not necessary. People who are going to violate your rules usually don’t wait until the end of a comment to do it. Skim the comment list. If you miss something, you’ll probably catch it later when you spot someone responding.
Skimming gets easier and faster the more you moderate. You’ll spot the style of frequent commenters from just the first few words, and know whether that person is rational or not. Eventually, you’ll get so that you can let your eyes wander over the comments as you scroll through them smoothly, relying on your brain to alert you when it processes something amiss. It happens subsconciously; when your brain waves a red flag, you’ll have to scroll back a few comments and maybe even read two or three all the way through before figuring out what triggered it.
Yes, it’s a bit like trusting the Force — but it works.
Use all your weapons. The methods we had to deal with comment bozos shifted around while I was at The PD. At first, we could only delete comments; if we wanted to put a user on ice or kill the account completely, we had to appeal to outside authorities. Eventually, we got the ability to instantly freeze someone’s account, which also had the delightful side effect of removing every other comment they’d ever made. After I left, Advance added a bozo filter, which makes a user’s comments invisible to other users but not the original commenter — so he or she doesn’t realize there’s a block, and doesn’t immediately create another account.
Whatever weapons your site gives you, use them. Comment moderation is no place for pacifists. Most of your problems will be caused by a very small percentage of your users. They will use every trick they can to disrupt your site. You owe it to the rest of your users to fight back.
Don’t let it get to you. Take breaks. Don’t take any attacks on your moderation personally; treat them as accolades for your effectiveness. Joke with colleagues.
Comment moderation is never easy, but these tips can get you over the rough spots.
John,
I would love some insight on some of the Cleveland.com posternalities. I have always had my suspicions about them, the fakes are easy to tell from the real guys but I could never be 100% sure.
I talk to EdinNaples on the phone and we are to get together this fall when my family and I go to Orlando on vacation.
I had to get to the point where I just accepted everyone as who they pretend to be and if they fooled me, so what.
This is also why I am so protective of my account, “deerhuntdave” is me, to read my comments is to know exactly who I am, I don’t make stuff up, I don’t have to, I know I am blessed with a rich life.
Dave,
For most of the time I ran the comment moderation, I was in much the same boat — I had my suspicions, but couldn’t be 100% sure. One advantage we had as moderators was that we lived in those comments day after day, so spotting the duplicates and recognizing writing styles was easier.
It seemed apparent, for example, that in terms of real trolls — commenters who just came in to stir things up — there were far fewer real individuals than usernames. Our guess was that they tended to be younger. Being a dedicated troll is such a pointless existence that people tend to grow out of it, I think — or at least have less time for it when they have to work and have a real life.
While there are some users who maintain two usernames because they want to keep their IDs separate — for example, they want to argue for their political beliefs in the news and opinion stories, but don’t want to drag that into sports talk — most of the other duplicates were in two other categories. There were the cantankerous, who had multiple usernames because they knew they’d keep losing some of them as they violated our rules. And there were the issue advocates and grudge carriers, who tried to use multiple accounts to make it look as if they were part of a movement, not lone wolves. Why anyone would think a) that mattered, and b) the comments section ever swayed anyone else’s opinion, that we never figured out. But we knew that on some topics — particularly, for some reason, those involving the teachers’ union — the conversations were often mostly two armies of sock puppets talking to each other.
As far as frequent but not crazy commenters, like yourself, it was our impression that they tended to be older. The Browns attract a lot of Cleveland expatriates, particularly retirees. (The average age for the site overall was higher than you might think — lower than for the printed paper, but still not spring chickens.) We happened to learn that two groups — people who work in real estate, and lawyers or those who work in law offices — were, for some reason, overrepresented among the nastiest and/or most racist commenters.
Thank you for the insight. I would have guessed that you guys could have easily found out who was posting comments from the same computer using 17 different screen names.
I thoroughly enjoy the interaction on the site, I still go there daily. The rules seem to be a little loser these days, which I like, you know I don’t shy from a good fight and can give some tough shots, shots that are accurate as much as they are hard.
I love the chance to give an opposite opinion to what I perceive to be the liberal bias in almost all the media. The woman who is married to the Ohio sitting senator, Shultz, she was especially irritating to me and I loved giving it back to her as much as she gave it to us all. I respected her for entering the fray and sticking up for her contentions, even if I strongly disliked her personally. More than that though I love the interaction with the Browns fans, sometimes I sit at the table writing on the threads and laughing out loud to the point that my wife will come in to ask what is so funny. There are more really smart guys out there than I suspected, and there are a dozen or so who are better than the writers under whose articles we comment.
Anyhoo, great to talk to you again, I hope things are well with you, I will keep in touch.
After a certain incident, Plain Dealer people had no access to identifying information.
As far as Connie Schultz, she did try to interact with commenters, but she was the target of extremely nasty personal insults and innuendo. One of the lowlights of my time as comment moderator was having to get up early on Sunday mornings to wade through the muck that quickly accumulated on her column.
One more quick question, I hope you answer it fully for me. I know I am combative at times and hit hard with some of my comments, although I never let those two aspects own my commenting style.
Did the folks at the site and the paper develop a personal dislike for me based on my comments as it pertains to ideology, even if they didn’t allow it to affect how they moderated the comments ?
I wouldn’t describe the moderators’ attitude toward any commenter as “personal.” We couldn’t have kept going if we didn’t learn to be keep away from that. Also remember, we had the ultimate say; we had the tools — better and better ones, as the years went on — to deal with those who consistently violated the rules.
The fact that you were able to keep “deer” alive tells you that you were never a big concern of ours. For one thing, you generally stayed away from personal attacks, which are the things that create the most trouble. Also, I don’t recall you being particularly persistent. The rat-a-tat commenter who bombard posts, feeling the need to reply to every single other commenter, drive other commenters crazy and, thus, get on the moderators’ nerves. Honestly, the politics of the commenters didn’t matter.
I will say — and I think I’m remembering this correctly; forgive me if I’m thinking of another commenter — that we did wonder about how your news-side comments would sometimes suggest the world was in horrible shape and getting worse all the time, but you still found the time to head over to the sports blogs and chat.
I am a member of the community of administrators of discussion boards on Forumotion.com. I am searching for articles about moderation because I have a project to create some kind of modern and detailed list with all useful moderation tips for my community.
I think that moderators play a very important role in the life and development of each discussion forum. I found your text very interesting and helpful, but I have some questions. Do you think that deleting comments is a good practice, even for the forums, not only for the brand social pages?
What kind of tone would you recommend for the moderators – friendly, “smiling” or hard and neutral?
Would do you say about “community moderation”? How should an administrator “learn’ his moderators to do a good job?
Thank you, John, for your attention to my questions.
Mike,
To give you the benefit of the doubt and presume that the self-promotional slogans I deleted from your comment were just things you threw in reflexively, here are my answers:
1. Comment moderation policies should reflect the site’s desired tone. If you want a no-holds-barred site, don’t delete anything. If you prefer some limits, enforce them, through deletions as needed.
2. The bigger the number of users, the more important that a moderator maintain a neutral tone. It’s fine to be chipper and smiling if you’re only dealing with a few people a day. It’s too risky to try that if you’re dealing with a flood: Some will confuse your cheerfulness for lack of seriousness; others will try to take advantage of it to lure you into drawn-out off-topic discussions.
3. Moderators should be encouraged, especially when they’re new, to go to the administrator if they’re unsure about a decision. Administrators should periodically review comments — including those deleted from the front end — to make sure everyone’s operating consistently.
Thank you John for your anwsers,
they are convincing.
And I am really sorry for the “self-promotional slogans”.
About your 3d point : I really agree with you and I think that this role of the administrator is unfortunately often forgotten.