It has been suggested we prevent readers from commenting on articles about Indigenous issues.
Blocking comments is not something the media does lightly, however.
Comment sections exist to provide a place for readers to engage, share opinions and, from time to time, suggest corrections (unfortunately the odd error happens—at least until human journalists are replaced by Artificial Intelligence).
When comments or conversations are blocked on a story, it usually has to do with them having devolved into personal and/or libellous attacks.
With the ongoing pipeline protests and related blockades — a national story that touches the lives of many — the comment sections on our website have seen little activity. Social media, however, is another matter.
While stories about Indigenous protesters and defenders have sparked interesting dialogue and debate, they have unfortunately also prompted race-based degradation and other hostilities.
Equally deplorable are comments suggesting protesters on railway tracks be run over by trains.
Sometimes these comments suggesting injury or death are met with happy faces and thumbs up from commenters.
This behaviour on social media adds nothing to the conversation, does nothing to promote useful debate and does everything to widen divides, promote fear and hatred, and give legitimacy to violence.
Another avenue some media are opting for is to no longer share such stories about Indigenous issues on social media, so as to avoid the potential headache of moderating.
What will they do with other stories that stir controversy and/or conflicting opinions among readers – as compelling news stories tend to do?
The late Henry Grunwald, once editor of Time, said journalism can never be silent — that is its greatest virtue and its greatest fault.
Journalism has an obligation to inform public opinion – unfortunately, it is increasingly being put in the position where it must also silence it.
– Lachlan Labere is editor of the Salmon Arm Observer.