What Would You Do?

Fellow bloggers,

Someone who appropriately has a Yahoo e-mail address commented on my Oscar post objecting to the "nigger music" that won best song.

I'm not exactly shocked, shocked to find that there are people who think that way (I'm assuming she's not just a black reader agreeing with Shay of Booker Rising), but do I ignore it (and appear hospitable to it), delete it (and shield this person from the eyes of the world), or simply point to it?

I've guess I've made my choice. What would you do?

Comments

[flashcat]

It's up to you, but I think I'd point to it--which you've actually already done--without commenting and then ignore it. That way you haven't acquiesced to their opinion, nor fed their strange ego with more attention than it deserves by gracing it with a reply or deleting it (which might give her a feeling of satisfaction for having upset you so much you felt compelled to do just that). ...Just my two cents.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Depends on if it's going to nag at you. If it stays on your mind, delete it.

[geoduck2]

I'm sorry someone wrote that on your blog. Ugh.

I guess I'd either point it out for a discussion or delete it.

[karen]

If you delete, aren't you doing the same thing that the Terrorists want the MSM to do?

If it happens again, warn the dude- warn him/her now- that you will delete any future slurs.

Even you could have a Troll :0(

[GN]

I would post it (without the email address) and let comments and discussion ensue. Perhaps this individual will learn something here. and perhaps we will learn something in turn. I think that the sentiment is disgusting, but I don't know where the sentiment comes from(learned at home, general dislike due to personal trauma, real sick racist, etc.)but I do think that would show itself pretty quickly.

Other than the obvious inflammatory feelings that get set off because it has been an issue in our culture for so long, it is no more contraversial than the abortion discussions. Free speech and open forums are places that will draw diametrically opposite positions .... so I say let's talk about it and see where it goes.

[amba]

Nah, Charlie, it's not going to bug me enough to delete it. It falls within my free-speech parameters. Like Ann A. said about a nasty commenter a few days ago, give the a**holes room to hang themselves. I probably have my limits, but they haven't been tried yet -- I'm not popular enough to be that hated.

[reader_iam]

Is this settled? Or do you want to hear a dissenting voice?

(And not so much on the basis on whether this speech is free and/or offensive, but rather whether a blog is more public square or front yard, visible by all passersby?)

Now that I've written this, of course it depends on your definition of how you view your blog.

[reader_iam]

That is, narrowly, in terms of "public square" vs. "front yard."

Both of these comments are VERY respectfully submitted, I trust that you will assume.

[GN]

Like Yogi Berra said at the top of the page " when you hit a fork in the road ....."

[michael reynolds]

You probably wouldn't expect this from me, but I'd delete it. My blog, my rules, is my approach.

[Mark Daniels]

I would definitely and unrepentantly delete it...but without announcement. It's your blog. You're trying to encourage civil discussion. That doesn't qualify. (The reason for not announcing the action is to avoid giving any attention to such "ideas.")

Mark

[reader_iam]

My questions were actually that.

[chez diva]

It's a shame that such ignorance and ugliness is still alive and well in this day and age.

Your pointing it out brings it to our attention but I think I would just have deleted it as I do with all garbage and spam.

[meade]

I'd like to think I would do exactly as you have done - ignore the comment directly while discussing it with readers in a separate interesting linky post, radiating exquisite insight-stimulating ambivacool.

[Horace Jeffery Hodges]

You certainly have the legal right to delete it. As 'owner-editor' of this blog, you can publish what you want and refuse to publish what you don't want.

I'd say that your chosen approach has been effective, but if the person turned out to be a troll, posting again and again, block the troll is my advice.

Jeffery Hodges

* * *

[amba]

It's been worth the conversation. Silver lining (as Gruntled would say). So I think next time I would delete it, but I'm glad I didn't this time.

reader, you really made me stop and think: do I regard my blog as front yard or public square?

I think it's actually the place where the front yard meets the street, and people come and lean on the low fence to chat, or come in and sit in the yard and have a beer in sight of the street. It's like the borderline between public and private property.

[meade]

That is a great image! - the low fence borderline between public and private space. It used to be a familiar common experience in American life - the public sidewalk and the semi-private front porch or stoop. I don't know of another blog that does a better job of virtually recreating that disappearing community space. Thanks for doing it.

[Alison]

I agree 100% with Mark.

But I also agree that the conversation here was worthwhile ... especially since the Blog as a Sidewalk metaphor sprung from it. LOVE that.

[Danny]

I have no problem deleting comments I find offensive on my blog. It's MY blog under my name, not a public forum in which I feel the broader implications of free speech apply. Ironically, the last time I deleted a comment was after my 2005 Oscars post. Some lunatic ranted about the Oscar-winning director of the documentary "Born into Brothels." He called her all sorts of hideous names and clearly had his own personal agenda about this woman that I had no interest in promoting. I don't mind getting critical comments on my blog, just not ugly inflammatory comments about other people.

[Melinda]

What you've done with the comment is the right thing in this case. And "Where the front yard meets the street" works for me!

[amba]

And if somebody came along and sprayed nasty graffiti on your fence, you'd wash it off! (Actually, in the old days, you'd go and get them by the ear and make them wash it off! Shades of Mayberry.)

[reader_iam]

I'm glad my comment sparked such a cool discussion!

I've been pondering the imagery for several months as far as what standards I'd want to set for a blog. I think of a party in my front yard, where others could stop by and have fun or even heated discussions, but need to be aware of the rights of my neighbors and that people pass by all of the time, on foot or by car, etc. No flashing little Janey as she walks the dog, for example, or torturing the stray cat, or relieving one's self in my neighbor's hedges in full view of old Mrs. Doe.

; )

[Seth Chalmer]

I'd definitely make it a post and comment, and invite discussion. I'd leave the post. For me, what's important is to shine a light on hatred, and condemn it. If it happened a second time, I might delete the second hateful post, but I'd probably post a comment noting that another hateful comment had been posted, and link to the original post. After time three, I'd just delete them without comment.

I hope I never have to deal with such a situation.

[Tom Strong]

I like Seth's suggestion, especially on blogs that deal a lot with ethical and political issues. It is, as Michael says, your blog, your rules. But, to repeat a somewhat tired phrase, sunlight remains the best disinfectant.

[Tamar]

I am with Danny and Mark.