Sat 21 Jun 2008
It’s a pretty well-known fact if you’re one of the millions of people who read your daily newspaper online. Many papers, including the Courant, provide some form of “public forum” that allows readers (or anyone) to post comments on a specific news item. Some are tightly moderated, or require that you register before you can post. Others, like the Topix forums to which the Courant articles link, can be used and abused by just about anyone.
So you know that if you read an article in the Courant and want to comment about, say, Gov. Rell’s efforts to pass a “3 strikes” law, or efforts to protect the rights of immigrants, or the latest Fox News attack on Barack Obama or his wife, you’re going to be faced with literally dozens of postings containing vile and disgusting racist attacks. While these comments are (allegedly) monitored for the use of terms that are outright and blatent hate speech, those that are allowed are replete with the nastiest and most vicious language that anyone can imagine. Of course you can just post your comment anyway, but you do it knowing that your comment will only be seen by someone who can tolerate reading post after post of the worst kind of filth without throwing up. In other words, forget about the idea that you are exchanging ideas with other people who are in your community (posters can be from anywhere in the U.S. or, for that matter, the world) and who want to make things better.
With these facts as background, and even if everyone else on this blog is going to be silent about it, congratulations to Mayor Eddie Perez for having the guts to speak out on this issue and take the Courant to task. Read the latest installment on his fight with the Courant here.
There is no First Amendment right to post comments on a privately-owned website. What the Courant has done, in effect, is to provide a completely anonymous soapbox for hate-filled individuals who typically see the world as a battleground between “decent” white christian Americans and the rest of the human race. While other news outlets that have forums have used a variety of tools to restrict the worst kind of hate speech, on Topix virtually anything goes.
Posters on this site and other local blogs, such as Queers without Borders, have criticized the Topix forums in the past . . . but it appears that no one else thought that Mayor Perez’s outright challenge to the Courant was worth comment. Given the attacks on Perez that have been posted here in the past, perhaps it’s a case of “Yes, it would be good if I said it but since Perez said it, it must be bad.”
June 21st, 2008 at 11:33 am
[…] [Courant] Hartford Mayor Protests Hate Speech on Courant Website arieanna wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptRell’s efforts to pass a “3 strikes” law, or efforts to protect the rights of immigrants, or the latest Fox News attack on Barack Obama or his wife, you’re going to be faced with literally dozens of postings containing vile and … […]
June 21st, 2008 at 1:05 pm
I think it makes sense that the Courant ask people to register before commenting. However, this often doesn’t deter detestable comments - just look at the Danbury News Times online, and the slew of homophobic comments following an article on marriage equality for same sex couples a few weeks ago.
However, I wonder how much Eddie Perez’s “demand” that the Courant delete offensive comments is related to protecting the civility of public forums; and how much is related to silencing the Courant’s investigations of corruption in his administration.
June 23rd, 2008 at 1:40 pm
See today’s column by Stan Simpson also calling for changes in the Courant’s forums section and noting the importance of Eddie Perez’s demonstration demanding action from the Courant.
June 23rd, 2008 at 3:52 pm
Thanks Peter for giving me food for thought. I for one who posts over at QWB stand quilty as charged and will use no excuses as to why I didn’t post anything about the mayor and the demonstration. This problem is far bigger than our dislikes and likes which shows in this case and in other cases there is a lot to learn starting with honesty and working for the common good of all.
In hindsight we all should have called for a demo a long time ago.
June 23rd, 2008 at 11:17 pm
Thank you Peter for posting this. When I first heard of the Press Conference, I debated whether to attend for I feared it would simply be another forum for Eddie and his Democratic entourage to capture some news coverage. However I did attend the press conference and was quite glad I did. There was a good cross section of local activists there and it was a pivotal message needing telling. As Kenny Green noted, CT needed to pass legislation to make it a hate crime to display nooses in public places. As in the old days where the public square was a vehicle for the community to exchange their views, so now the blogosphere has taken over the role to a major extent. And so it is imperative that all of us, as you note, react in securing this space to be a safe and hate free zone. Connecticut sees far too much racism and fascism, be it the nooses displayed around the state, the blatant racism in small towns like Plainfield, the blind eye the media and many politicians show to the violence that permeates so many lives of our urban communities though act tough when such violence strikes suburbia! Hate and fascism are enveloping our society like a dark cold fog and it is pivotal that we all work tirelessly to not allow this fog to permeate our souls, minds and spirits!
As an aside, I am not sure it is quite fair to be overly critical of other bloggers for not posting. I know personally I started crafting a piece over the weekend, reflecting my thoughts after attending the press conference, though also have many things pulling at my life and so just never as responsive as I would like to be.
One thing that also stood out for me at the press conference was the sign by one person there that challenged Eddie to be as outraged and engaged with the other many serious issues of crime (, poverty and injustice) facing those who live in Hartford.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:21 am
Jerimarie, I should have been more precise in my criticisms. Many people, including myself, justifiably have criticisms of Eddie Perez. But some bloggers here rant about him as if he were the incarnation of evil, finding every failure of City Hall and every rumor of political machinations to be further evidence of his satanic influence on the body politic.
My read on it is that much of our movement still suffers from the childish syndrome where our response to pain is to lash out at whoever is closest whether they caused the pain or not. Very satisfying in a temper tantrum and foot-stamping kind of way but not very effective.
In the process, we often fail to recognize not only that we can work with politicians like the mayor - but that we must. When Eddie Perez stood up at the disability rights rally at City Hall we all knew that he should have acted months ago and that he ignored the problem until forced to confront it . . . but we didn’t boo him off the podium, we recognized that if we pressure him and also work with him we can Get Some Things Done.
Our movement needs a strategy for how it will relate to and differentiate, say, the Mayor of Hartford from the Governor of Connecticut. And we also need to cultivate the discipline to do the unpleasant work of making things happen instead of carping from the sidelines.
June 24th, 2008 at 8:02 am
I hear ya Peter and must concur with your logic. If we are to have any hope of effecting fundamental change we MUST learn to work in Coaltions with a diverse group of people and organizations.
To topic, My Left Nutmeg has a piece on this issue also http://www.myleftnutmeg.com/showDiary.do;jsessionid=D69137055C0951763C7516B4B0A2FCBA?diaryId=9815
June 25th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
As someone who doesn’t respond very often, I thought I might appease the masses (or Peter) with my initial thoughts/opinions.
I’m still not sure how I feel about the whole censorship issue. At one end, I get nervous about too many restrictions. But at the other end, it is unfair for people to make hurtful and racist comments from the comfort of their gated communities (to be fair, i know that isn’t always the case, but i’m trying to make a point). It isn’t really the blog that is the issue, its the lack of education from predominatly white Connecticut, and beyond, who judge the urban communities whose families lived in a century ago. So do we restrict something, or do we work towards educating the masses. If we restrict the posts, won’t people just find another arena to vent through (like the increase in hits to the white supremecy websites as reported by the Courant this past weekend).
So there…that is where my mind is right now. For me, i’ve always been more of an observer than a post-er - and i always try to chalk up people comments to ignorance. but then, maybe that shows you something about myself - that i won’t stand up for something. hmmm…maybe something to work on in my next therapy session.
On another note: I couldn’t help but notice that Peter’s comments on Post 6 could also be applied to the current administration? the idea that our country didn’t get to the point we are total over the last 8 years of Bush’s reign. anyone? anyone? alright…it was just a thought.
June 25th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
Why in the hell should we be making positive posts about el jefe? The guy is the same childish gangster he was when he was young, seizing on any opportunity he can find to legitimize himself. This week the issue is the Courant’s racism (which is not news, in any sense of the word). The Courant, with whom he has a long-standing pissing match, which goes something like this:
Courant: You’re a pathetic excuse for a Mayor.
Perez: You’re a pathetic excuse for a newspaper.
That’s about the depth and breadth of that debate. (and btw, they both win, and the rest of us lose). So that’s the flavor of the week. I remember when it was Jena 6, when el jefe got up in front of the seething crowd and fed us a bunch of radical-sounding rhetoric, and those of us who knew better bit our tongues (um, why???) which was probably most of us.
Now, that said, I think Peter has a point. We’ve gotta be strategic when it comes to politicos, which I think tends to be neglected more out of some groups having shallow politics that are more interested in rhetoric than being effective. I think we need to play these assholes like we play our bosses. Smile to their face, feed them bullshit, pretend to swallow their bullshit, fix problems amongst your fellow workers, and apply some leverage against the bosses when need be. When the shit really hits the fan, we’ll be all the better prepared to kick some ass.
Now it’s of course a good thing that this is finally being addressed in the public sphere. But why stop there? I think we should be quick to seize upon the chance to point out the hypocracy of the whole situation and expand the debate outside of the pre-defined parameters. For example, el jefe is attacking the Courant’s racism, but continues to ignore the violent racism of the HPD. Obviously we can’t expect him to take the initiative to tackle the issue, but while we’re superficially on the topic of racism, throwing around all sorts of rhetoric, let’s push it further. Isn’t that what radicals are supposed to do??
June 26th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Something interesting: i was just reading a story of the crash this morning in Southington on NBC30.com. I decided to read the comments - as i always do and noticed that one of them was deleted that said, “good, i hope they die”. That wasn’t even the most offensive part - it was the subscribers name which i won’t repeat here, for sake of my entry being deleted. I noticed this because someone responded to the comment telling the person that they were insensitive. This is the first time i have seen any of the online news sections delete a comment. unfortunatly, they didn’t delete the response, so what the person said is still up there.
June 27th, 2008 at 8:52 am
The Courant (or actually the company that manages the forum site, Topix) has always - in theory at least - edited certain kinds of comments. And some forms of racist and sexist language does get removed…as do some of the other more vicious and personal kinds of attacks. But what they don’t do is require that an individual actually register with their website. Boards like the Topix forums that do require registration generally do not even require that you use your real name as your user name, but they do verify email addresses and collect IPS information and that process tends to create a higher level of accountability.
The defense of unregistered forums like the one currently used has typically been that it encourages speech. I think that’s turned upside down. A public forum that addresses controversial issues needs to not only be “free” but also safe . . . a place where voices that are often not heard can express opinions without being subjected to vicious attacks, or where racist and sexist codewords and stereotypes are not used to shove people out the door.
June 28th, 2008 at 10:28 am
I’m not sure if I buy what Matt is saying here on post # 9. Perez having been a former gang leader doesn’t bother me as much as does you. The fact that he had to struggle moving a million times through his childhood, sometimes having to carry the boxes from one apartment–and walking them to the new home one, was not one of my experiences growing up. But something that could help him tune into many people of Hartford better than me. Say what you will, he was elected–and within a fairly democratic system (clearly not perfect)–but local politics aren’t quite the same as a Federal ones. People can get involved and actually get elected without being rich millionaires.
He’s a politician. And politics is about power. So community organizers will always have to organize to get what we want from them.
But I was surprised to see him there at the Hotel and Restaurant workers picket line and then speaking out–jeopardizing his relationship with Travelors. I didn’t see any other politicians there. I haven’t seen that in a lot of the Hartford mayors in the past.
Clearly he’s not perfect, but his life history and the work he’s done brought him out to support minimum wage workers against a multinational corporation. And that is worthy of praise in my mind.
June 30th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Has anyone ever read the Danbury News-Times online? They require registration for blog comments. And their comments are consistently homophobic, racist, anti-immigrant, you name it. Registering provides an extra level of accountability and dialogue, perhaps, but it doesn’t make people more politically correct. Pro- or anti- Perez, I still don’t see the point of the Courant protest. The Courant is a fairly racist newspaper (as someone who grew up in Hartford can clearly see). Its readers consistently express racist views - whether in blog comments anonymously, in letters to the editor with their names and towns attached, or even from the editorial page itself. I think there are bigger issues for the mayor, and activists such as ourselves, to address. I appreciate this blog and others as a forum to do so.
June 30th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
I think you’re mistaken about the News Times Online. If you go to their comments pages all you are required to do is enter your “name” - which can be anything under the sun. One observer pointed out that in some instances people were deliberately creating cleverly concealed racist names in order to avoid being deleted by the monitors.
June 30th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
[…] Commenting after a related post on this subject at the Hartford-based blog Undercurrents, reader Gannon questioned the value of having readers register: “Has anyone ever read the Danbury News-Times online? They require registration for blog comments. And their comments are consistently homophobic, racist, anti-immigrant, you name it. Registering provides an extra level of accountability and dialogue, perhaps, but it doesn’t make people more politically correct.” Peter G correctly replied, “If you go to their comments pages all you are required to do is enter your ‘name’—which can be anything under the sun.” […]
July 2nd, 2008 at 6:34 pm
Urban Compass and Peter, you’re still ignoring the larger point of my comment. What about the letters to the editor section in the Courant? For as long as I can remember, that’s been full of people’s racist comments that include names and addresses. There are many online forums where people have to register, and don’t realize how homophobic/racist/sexist etc their comments are. or don’t care. Plenty of DJs and talk show hosts talking about the “pregnant man,” Thomas Beattie of Oregon, with appalling transphobia. Hiding behind a code name is not the issue. It’s the prejudices that are the issue. And I guess the Courant got the point, since they’ve changed the way people post comments. But I still think that to push racism to the shadows doesn’t make it not exist. It just means it exists in the shadows.
It’s not just the blog commenters who are the problem at the Courant. It’s the editorial staff, the people who endorse Joe Lieberman and George Bush, the stories they green light that exploit Hartford’s people for a profit, that provide a context for racist comments. The blog is simply a new medium. It’s the same prejudice it’s always been.
July 2nd, 2008 at 9:22 pm
Gannon,
I don’t think anyone is ignoring the larger point of your comment, but you seem to be saying that because racism is everywhere it’s silly to actually expect anyone to do anything about it anywhere.
Your comments - the content of which appear to me to be 100% factually true - remind me of the feminist legal scholar Catherine McKinnon. McKinnon wrote eloquently about the subjugation of women and the extent to which legal commentators ignored the everyday violence that women suffer at the hands of men. The conclusion that she reached as a result of her analysis was that because all interactions between men and women are characterized by male dominance and male violence, therefore all sexual intercourse between men and women was rape.
The most powerful rebuke to her position came not from outraged male legal scholars (though many certainly were outraged) but from women who worked in rape crisis counseling. Their response to McKinnon was that her conclusion minimized the reality of sexual assault by taking a broad spectrum of actions and giving them all the same name. This ignored the real differences between everyday acts of male dominance and crimes of violence.
It is true that many of the people that write letters to the editors or op-eds in the Courant say things that reflect racist and white supremacist attitudes and assumptions. But that it not the same as posting a comment in an anonymous online forum saying “How do you fix Hartford’s problems? Drop an atom bomb on the north end,” or “Hartford’s problems get worse the darker it becomes.”
These statements aren’t just incredibly offensive and insulting, but are the kinds of statements that will make many people reluctant to even participate in a discussion because of the level of hatred and outright bigotry that they reflect.
It was and is appropriate to challenge and oppose the editorial practices that permit this sort of verbal cross-burning to dominate online discussions at the Courant. The fact that those that spoke out did not also condemn every reporter and editorial writer at the Courant in the same breath does not invalidate their criticisms.
July 6th, 2008 at 12:06 am
I think David’s response to my comments is pretty superficial frankly. I’m not looking down upon Perez cuz he used to be a gang member. There are plenty of great individuals who came out of a life of crime; Malcolm X comes to mind. The point I’m trying to make is that he still acts like he’s the tough kid on the block; he never grew up, and because it’s that kind of posture that thrives in the local political environment, he never saw any need to change.
Yes, he’s not perfect, he’s a politician. And when he shows up to a rally, whether it’s in front of a hotel, or in front of the Courant, or in support of the Jena 6, he’s got one thing in mind: his own career. That’s what politicians do. Not once have I ever encountered a politician that made me re-consider that opinion. I hope my bud Luis Cotto proves me wrong, but the system tends to do an extremely effective job of either corrupting or ejecting anybody that gets elected with the intention of changing things.
July 7th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
Here are some examples of the courant’s new format, where people entered their names and locations, commenting on the front page article on the Youth FIC.
“Comeon you bigot — how about another comment about the Courant foisting its “extreme liberal agenda” on us?
This story is evidence your claims about the Courant are a lie.
You are a lying bigot Shoreliner — a lying, low-down, dirty bigot.”
“Peter Wolfgang is the anti-Christ. He is the most hateful person I have ever met.”
These are some examples of what religious people might call hate speech, attributed by name to commenters on the Courant’s new and improved Topix board. I just think the issue is kind of a distraction to more egregious forms of racism, bad media, etc. that the mayor and others could concentrate on.