Sick Sad Week: An Urgent Call to End the Coulterization of Debate at Associated Content

This will be a special edition of Sick Sad Week. Typically, the Sick Sad Week column looks at the best of the worst in the world of national news. But this week will instead focus on the sick sad goings-on here at Associated Content. Regular, long-time visitors to Associated Content have
 no doubt noticed that various changes in format have taken place regarding the rating system and the comment sections on articles here. Of course, Associated Content is hardly the only site on the internet where readers are allowed to express opinion and the problems this site is experiencing are being experienced around the web. It is, in many respects, a problem that is merely a symptom of a significantly larger problem.

At the risk of turning this article into one of my usual ideological screeds—something I am hoping to avoid this time around—I have come to describe this problem as the Coulterizaton of debate. (As proof of my sincere hope to try to avoid indulging in ideology, I will refrain from using my own personal anagrammatical appellation for Ms. Coulter.) Over the past few months—but with increasing intensity over the past few weeks—I as well as many other writers and readers have noticed a distinctive and unpleasant turn that the comments left on articles at Associated Content have taken. Rather than engaging in intellectual disagreement and analytical debate with the ideas and opinions being expressed, more and more comments are being left that belong more on blogs—or even on the side of walls—than on a web site devoted to providing information on literally every topic imaginable. At its best, Associated Content could become the destination of choice for people in need of a huge information database. Associated Content could become the destination of choice for those looking to read about something and then take part in intelligent and thoughtful debate with not ony the writer, but other readers. But the way things are going here, that isn’t going to happen.

Related information
  • If you disagree passionately enough, write an article instead of leaving a personal attack.
  • I urge everyone to block stupid, hateful, inane comments left by anonymous posters.
  • We have the opportunity to make Associated Content stand out as a site of intelligent debate.
 
Comments 1 - 10 of 17 Next >>
Comments
Type in Your Comments Below

It is now December. Your article was written Spetember 11. Thankfully the volume has been turned down a bit on epithet-spewers. Here's hoping we can return to civil discourse and cogent speech. Nice article.

Posted on 12/16/2006 at 8:12:00 AM

Very well written, very well said. Love it! -Christina

Posted on 09/24/2006 at 3:09:00 PM

You know I'm with you on this one, Tim. Thanks.

Posted on 09/18/2006 at 4:09:00 PM

Tim, THANK YOU for exposing the likes of S.L.Brandish and others like her! I know first hand what it is like to be attacked by her for my view. Im my case however it backfired on her and my readers went after her. My article "laws that help children hurt them instead" was her target.SHE LOST 112 comments I recieved. Thank you for letting others know of her COMPLETE lack of professionalism. I would love to see her BANNED from AC for her tactics

Posted on 09/14/2006 at 7:09:00 AM

Correction--the article by Manda I referred to earlier was called, The War on Terror: Protesting the Liberation of Iraq. However, the long string of comments are no longer there to be viewed.

Posted on 09/14/2006 at 6:09:00 AM

Also, Stephanie is right--Oswald did not act alone. Seriously, read Ultimate Sacrifice by Lamar Waldron and Thom Hartmann. It is an amazingly documented and much more plausible theory than the Oliver Stone film promoted, having to do with mob figures Marcello, Traficante and Roselli, their links to the CIA, Castro assination attempts & Bobby & JFK's war against organized crime. I'm telling you, it's very convincing. Be warned that it is a very loooong read.

Posted on 09/14/2006 at 6:09:00 AM

GREAT ARTICLE TIM!! There is no doubt that this is a problem primarily of the right-wing types on AC--and I applaud you for highlighting Manda Spring and Bradish, as they are by far the worst offenders. I quickly found this out when commenting on Manda's fallacy filled article on Cindy Sheehan(Protesting the War on Terror). I think the comment section of that article may be teh best example of what Tim is describing. Although my opening comment ws harsh--calling her article disgraceful--it was not a personal attack on Manda as much as it was a comment on the content of her article, which was filled with falsehoods. Needless to say I was hit with more than a few attacks of a personal nature for days on end. When they comment on my articles, they usually open by calling me a sick, pathetic person who should'nt quit my day job due to my poor writing.

Posted on 09/14/2006 at 5:09:00 AM

Brian: If you don't think this problem lies more with those on the right than on the left, then just check out Tiffany Ranae's article on Jesus the Whip Cracker. For an example of the worst kind of commentary, just check out the level of discourse that Manda Spring and SL Bradish consider to be illuminating. And as for personal attacks during the Clinton administration, you're right: Clinton was accused of murdering Vince Foster, of raping women, of having pot parties in the White House...oh, you meant the personal attacks BY the Clinton administration. Sorry, can't think of any that were even as bad what Bush did to his own fellow Republican John McCain during the 2000 S. Carolina primary.

Posted on 09/14/2006 at 3:09:00 AM

Sorry - I am new here - i meant to give a rating of five out of five but it registered 4 out of five. Very good article.

Posted on 09/13/2006 at 7:09:00 PM

P.S. Oswald didn't act alone :P

Posted on 09/13/2006 at 1:09:00 PM

Comments 1 - 10 of 17 Next >>