Online Readers Should Tone Down The Invective

By Courtland Milloy
Wednesday, May 13, 2009

Who are you people?

You get invited to make comments about my work on The Washington Post Web site, and you turn my online message post into a dart board. You swagger into cyberspace under assumed names and start hurling invectives like drunks in a barroom brawl.

Sorry, but I must ask some of you to go elsewhere.

I wrote a column recently about alleged racial discrimination in the D.C. fire
department, then went to see what I hoped would be your enlightened responses. What I found was uva2manassas and ged0368 at each others' throats. And now I've had enough. I'm used to getting impassioned feedback, but this was out of hand.

UVA2: "Instead of stupidly reponding 'racism' to every critism, prove blacks aren't lazy morons by bettering yourself."

GED: "you are a racist white reneck. White ppl did the slaving on every race."

Look at that, using broken English like shards of a whiskey bottle to attack each other.

Such uncouth behavior not only discourages thoughtful guests from expressing their views, but it also diminishes my online reader profile. As my colleague David Ignatius noted in his op-ed column Sunday about the future of the newspaper business, newspaper Web sites need to become more profitable if we are to survive. And the more we know about our online readers, the more precisely we can sell their demographics to advertisers.

Sure, I get some intelligent comment, but lately I'm wondering what to make of the growth of an increasingly noxious demographic.

UNOJKLHH1: "far left wingers like [Attorney General Eric] holder and [President
Barack] obama's version of a "discussion" on race is one where they talk and everyone else shuts up and bows down to the lord and savior al sharpton . . . its white people's fault for bringing em over here -- take up a collection and give em a boat ride back home."

INTERACTIDIOMAS: "Well, your kith and kin killed most of the original inhabitants here, captured africans to build a nation here- sounds like YOUR work is done- guess we should send you back to Ireland, Scotland or some other place that your kind is descended from; don't let the elections hit you in the azz, as you leave!"

People, please. What advertiser is going to be attracted by stuff like that?

So who are you, really? Do you smile at your black and white co-workers by day, then sit in the glow of a computer screen at night posting odious screeds? (I'm not necessarily alleging racism here; you could be suffering from irritable bowel syndrome for all I know -- a malady of interest to pharmaceutical advertisers, perhaps?)

I could report literary miscreants to The Post's online word police, but what good would that do? Categories of prohibited expression include "obscenity/vulgarity," "hate speech" and "personal attack." Otherwise, according to Post rules, you must be at least 13 years old to submit a comment. Nothing says you can't be ignorant.

It's no less disheartening, though, to watch newspaper Web sites count even those who write racist, sexist, anti-Semitic and homophobic comments as "unique visitors" in a desperate appeal to advertisers.

On the upside, it's probably better that some of us have a chance to fight over conflicting views online and behind screen names, lest we take to the streets
wearing sheets, pointy hoods and bandito scarves. Write on, if you must.

But why, with billions of other destinations along the information superhighway,
do some of you even bother to get off at my exit? Your fan mail is not always
convincing.

IOWEIOWEOFF2WORKIGO: "I take great delight in reading your editorials. I am
continuously amused by your race baiting drivel. Keep up the good work."

I actually like that screen name, especially the "off to work I go" part, which was sung by the Seven Dwarfs. I wonder which one wrote the letter.

According to Ignatius, The Post Web site had 9.4 million visitors in March. "And
before long, we should also be able to create specialized content for users based on what we know about their interests and habits," he wrote.

And what do we know so far?

BLKCHINADOLL_69: "Anyone who spends that much time on the Internet saturating the WAPO with pejorative comments about another ethnicity, is obviously over compensating for something they indeed lack -- a position of authority and a sense of self assuredness."

Advertisers of hair restoration treatments, get-buff-quick schemes, Thorazine and ED pills: you getting any of this?

E-mail: milloyc@washpost.com