Civility

By now you may have heard of the altercation that took place between Mena Trott (SixApart.com) and Ben Metcalfe (backstage.bbc.co.uk) at the recent Les Blogs conference in France. Mena gave a keynote speech about civility in blogging. Metcalfe (and others in the audience) took exception to what they considered to be the patronizing tone of the talk. So far, none of this is particularly unusual. Keynote speakers speak; audience members mutter among themselves. All part of the usual conference setting.

However, at this conference, the audience members were linked online by IRC "back-channel" and the chat session was displayed, live, for all to see... including the speaker. Partway through Mena's keynote, one of the IRC chatters (Metcalfe) remarked: “this is bullshit”. Ouch.

Apparently the session went rapidly downhill from there. :-(

Most of us don't think fast on our feet, especially if we feel we're being attacked on public (especially if we're feeling a bit nervous about making a speech in the first place). It's hard not to react with the first thought in our minds - to strike back at the person who lobbed the (perceived) insult. Interpersonal communication tends to be like this when conducted in realtime.

The resulting argument between Mena Trott and Ben Metcalfe (held first in front of 300 conference attendees and then re-hashed in hundreds of weblog articles across the globe) appears, to me, to underscore Mena's original keynote topic nicely.

Whatever happened to Civility?

In her speech, Mena said:

A strong voice is a crucial part of a successful blog. But sometimes sensationalism can be confused with a strong voice. The saying "if it bleeds, it leads" isn't just limited to the nightly news or cable news anymore. Bloggers have become very aware that "if it bleeds, it leads" can work wonders for their Google Juice.

When I started to think about what I wanted to speak about today, the phrase "civility in blogging" kept on popping into my head. When I say "civility in blogging," I'm basically referring to the demeanor or the desired demeanor that we conduct ourselves when we're blogging. Civility is a difficult concept to speak about without sounding preachy or condemning. I don't want to give a lecture today on civility -- God only knows that my coworkers would laugh to hear me talk about politeness. Instead of lecturing, I really just have a simple question: Can we as bloggers be more civil?

Ben Metcalfe calls this request "naive" and "patronizing". He calls this a culture issue, saying that "Europeans are, if anything, known for their frank exchanges during conversation – certainly more than the Americans." (Well, gosh, I thought the common wisdom was that we Americans were rude...).

Metcalfe proceeds to write (in his weblog):

... overall I just found the presentation to be simply ill judged for the audience she was addressing. Sure, it might be a positive aspiration for everyone to be “nicer”, but surely that’s not an issue for the blogosphere? Surely if people don’t relate to each other in a nice way all the time, that’s a matter for society in general?

I certainly didn’t think it had any place at a blogging conference. Even more so when you consider blogging is still a niche and is being driven into the mainstream by the very type of people who are opinionated and want to get the conversation and debate started – and opinionated views aren’t always “nice” to one the parties being discussed. Asking bloggers to water down what they are saying – and how they say it - seems very counter-productive.

So... if the blogosphere is where we're interacting, why isn't a call for "niceness" relevant there? How do we change society in general if we can't address society in small specific areas? What makes a call for civility naive? When does frankness cross over into rudeness?

Shouldn't it be possible to take exception to another person's point of view, and argue your points against theirs, without saying “this is bullshit” in front of hundreds of people (many of whom will publish the conversation more widely)?

I tend to agree with Mena's essay. I have also observed that sensationalism is too popular in journalism (and therefore in weblogs), that people don't tend to think before they type, and that civility is often missing in online discourse. It's been this way on electronic discussion groups for years; people say things online that they aren't as willing to say in person.

I use a "mantra" I learned many years ago

Wait until the screen stops flashing red and black before you start to type.

It means stop. Move away from the keyboard before somebody gets hurt.Think before you wave your arms and shout (electronically) in public. Re-read what you wrote. Do you need to be offensive (or defensive) to underscore your point? Do you really need to include that pithy insult? Take it out.

Consider the online persona you are building. Your online words are, in many ways, permanent. Years from now, someone (perhaps your potential boss at that job you really want to land) will read those words and make judgments about you. Like it or not, what you write reflects who you are.

Can we have a debate instead of an argument? Everybody is watching...

Comments

[Ben Metcalfe]

How do we change society in general if we can't address society in small specific areas? What makes a call for civility naive? When does frankness cross over into rudeness?

Why should we change society, at all? Or to be more specific/accurate - what business do bloggers (and especially those who lead the blogoshere) have in trying to change the fundamental fabric of how people converse with one another?

These issues are valid, but it's not the blogoshere's place to be dictating such lowest common denominator matters.

Thats the root of my point.

Shouldn't it be possible to take exception to another person's point of view, and argue your points against theirs, without saying “this is bullshit” in front of hundreds of people

Yes it should, and is possible. But equally, if what I said communicated the concern and severity of my feelings, than why shouldn't have said what I said?

Consider the online persona you are building. Your online words are, in many ways, permanent. Years from now, someone (perhaps your potential boss at that job you really want to land) will read those words and make judgments about you. Like it or not, what you write reflects who you are.

Yeah, no shit! But not everyone chooses to toe the politically correct, middle of the road. I'd rather say what I felt and have that clash with potential employer/investor (or perhaps more realistically be forced to explain my words) than say nothing, keep shtoom and pretend I didn't realy think what I think.

I am what I am, and I feel it more honest to be upfront than to pretend to be something I'm not.

Being prepared to walk a different path to the rest often has it's advantages - for both the person concerned and anyone who chooses to work with them (do you really want your start-up full of people who all agree with you?).

I also believe that people hire people for what's in their head and in their heart; their abilities, their skills, their talents and their knowledge - not for the statements they have/haven't written on blogs and said in public.

[Vicki]

But equally, if what I said communicated the concern and severity of my feelings, than why shouldn't have said what I said?

As you say, "if". But you didn't communicate the concern and severity of your feelings. You were simply rude in public.

I believe that more people are willing to listen to, and engage in, a civil debate. A weblog, a mailing list, a keynote speach with comments from the audience - all of these are conversations. They remain conversations - and we learn from each other - if we can all keep a civil tongue in our heads (and civil fingers on the keyboard).

Civility need not (should not) equate to "political correctness" nor to "the middle of the road". Choosing to engage in civil discourse will not cause you to lose your integrity or your ability to be frank and honest. However... it might influence people in a different way.

Whether you like it or not, people will judge you by the words you use. When those words are recorded, people will judge you again and again. Choose your words wisely.