Wednesday, May 23, 2012

THE ROLE OF A GOOD BLOG MODERATOR

Pending before the Texas Supreme Court is the Coronado case. It is a lawsuit against the Herald and Peter Zavaletta. An issue before the Texas Supreme Court is, is the standard for suing the Herald lower for false statements in political ads versus actual news reporting.  This is an interesting question which forever could bring a level of greater integrity to political ads. If the Herald loses it will never again run ads which they know to be misleading. Examples would be ads accepted by the Herald this election cycle which included false statements against Judge Cisneros Nelson and Rebecca Rubane.

A good moderator does not view posts based on liability. This view is why journalism has died in the US. I rarely trust any story in the press to be fully accurate. A good moderator views posts as factual or extending the discussion. On Wednesday night I denied a host of posts all by the same person. The person is a Saenz supporter. How do I know this? All of the posts denounced Masso, De Ford and Erasmos Castro. All of the posts had a variation of tags - Former DA - Former county Employee - Former BISD employee - really? - did you think even an idiot would not notice? It is the role of a good moderator to reject such comments.

It is common knowledge people will believe just about any lie or disinformation posted on the internet. This is why a good moderator simply rejects the posts. The BV will not be used to spread lies or disinformation. When I report it is based on having personally spoken with the source and making a decision as to the credibility of the source. To all of you people who want to post as anony with unsubstantiated lies and disinformation - you have 4 other places in Brownsville where such posts are accepted all day every day. Do me a favor - stop - your posts will never get through.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

One of the many complaints I have of the Brownsville Herald is that they run letters to the editor that make statements that are clearly inaccurate and that they should know are inaccurate. I don't understand why they would run sometimes inflamatory statements that are incorrect. The most positive spin I can put on it for the Herald is that their editors are lazy.
Mescalero