
© Screenshot
From “Letters to the editor” to comments on news websites and social media pages, audience feedback on news stories and opinion pieces in newspapers and magazines can take many forms. But does it also affect how readers see a story? Can negative comments from readers even undermine the credibility of an article?
As an old study by Lander in 1972 showed, audience feedback can fulfill the function of a “social safety valve”. Comments enable readers to release their frustrations through self-expression, thus serving as a form of catharsis. However, comment sections have also opened the door for expressions of incivility and negativity that include hostility against news outlets, their content and their journalists. For many, this raises an important question: Will managing online news comments become the new urgent challenge in journalism?
Online Comments And News Credibility
Frank Waddell, an assistant professor at the University of Florida’s College of Journalism and Communication, addressed this question in his recent study “What does the crowd think? How online comments and popularity metrics affect news credibility and issue importance”. His research tried to understand how negative reader comments affect other reader’s reception of news stories.
With this aim in mind Waddell conducted an online experiment with 289 participants who were asked to browse a Twitter feed with a low or high number of stories about heroin addiction, a topic that is – according to Waddell – not yet politically polarised (or at least not as much as other topics). Participants were then directed to the second page where they were able to see the comments of the readers on a story and the number of times a story had been re-tweeted or ‘liked’. In a last step, they were directed to a page with a story about eight overdoses from heroin that happened in the county of Washington, Pennsylvania.
Through this set-up, Waddell sought to understand how factors such as the frequency of the topic in the news feed, negative and positive readers’ comments, as well as the number of re-tweets and likes a story has received influence the perceived credibility and importance of the story.
Waddell’s study found that negative comments decreased readers’ trust in a story’s credibility. It’s a phenomenon he calls “bandwagon support”: people tend to feel less inclined to believe in a story that many other people are not satisfied with. However, while readers’ comments seemed to have an effect, Waddell also found that the number of likes and re-tweets a news story has garnered does not influence other readers’ reception of the contents.
On the other hand, his findings revealed that negative comments decreased perceptions of crowd support which attenuates the first-level agenda-setting effect of the media. This in return gives more power to the audience whose negative comments can undercut the perceived importance of issues.
Implications For News Organisations
Bill Reader’s book “Audience Feedback in the News Media” states that audience feedback is one of the longest unbroken traditions among all modern practices of journalism. Waddell’s study takes these findings a step further, and shows that media organisations must take the effect of readers’ comments seriously.
Concerns about the possible effects of reader comments are justified and well warranted. Especially negative and uncivil online comments threaten the perceived journalistic quality of a news story. Consequently, there is a need to find good solutions for managing comment sections in online news, and media outlets should consider ways to moderate, de-anonymise or remove comments to decrease the effect of negative comments.
Reuters provides an example here. In November 2014, the news agency removed the comment sections on its news stories to motivate their audience to move discussions to social media and online platforms. For Reuters, this was the best solution as those spaces offer “vibrant conversation and, importantly, are self-policed by participants to keep on the fringes those who would abuse the privilege of commenting”.
This does not mean that all outlets have to go the “Reuters Way”. Yet, they have to keep the effect of negative comments in mind. The alternative is sapping of their own credibility – an idea not too comforting in times where trust in journalism is already low.
You may also be interested in Germany’s AfD: With The Media And Against The Media.
Sign up for the EJO’s regular monthly newsletter or follow us on Twitter.
Do Online Comments Affect The Credibility Of News?
May 3, 2018 • Recent, Research • by Rana Khaled Arafat
© Screenshot
From “Letters to the editor” to comments on news websites and social media pages, audience feedback on news stories and opinion pieces in newspapers and magazines can take many forms. But does it also affect how readers see a story? Can negative comments from readers even undermine the credibility of an article?
As an old study by Lander in 1972 showed, audience feedback can fulfill the function of a “social safety valve”. Comments enable readers to release their frustrations through self-expression, thus serving as a form of catharsis. However, comment sections have also opened the door for expressions of incivility and negativity that include hostility against news outlets, their content and their journalists. For many, this raises an important question: Will managing online news comments become the new urgent challenge in journalism?
Online Comments And News Credibility
Frank Waddell, an assistant professor at the University of Florida’s College of Journalism and Communication, addressed this question in his recent study “What does the crowd think? How online comments and popularity metrics affect news credibility and issue importance”. His research tried to understand how negative reader comments affect other reader’s reception of news stories.
With this aim in mind Waddell conducted an online experiment with 289 participants who were asked to browse a Twitter feed with a low or high number of stories about heroin addiction, a topic that is – according to Waddell – not yet politically polarised (or at least not as much as other topics). Participants were then directed to the second page where they were able to see the comments of the readers on a story and the number of times a story had been re-tweeted or ‘liked’. In a last step, they were directed to a page with a story about eight overdoses from heroin that happened in the county of Washington, Pennsylvania.
Through this set-up, Waddell sought to understand how factors such as the frequency of the topic in the news feed, negative and positive readers’ comments, as well as the number of re-tweets and likes a story has received influence the perceived credibility and importance of the story.
Waddell’s study found that negative comments decreased readers’ trust in a story’s credibility. It’s a phenomenon he calls “bandwagon support”: people tend to feel less inclined to believe in a story that many other people are not satisfied with. However, while readers’ comments seemed to have an effect, Waddell also found that the number of likes and re-tweets a news story has garnered does not influence other readers’ reception of the contents.
On the other hand, his findings revealed that negative comments decreased perceptions of crowd support which attenuates the first-level agenda-setting effect of the media. This in return gives more power to the audience whose negative comments can undercut the perceived importance of issues.
Implications For News Organisations
Bill Reader’s book “Audience Feedback in the News Media” states that audience feedback is one of the longest unbroken traditions among all modern practices of journalism. Waddell’s study takes these findings a step further, and shows that media organisations must take the effect of readers’ comments seriously.
Concerns about the possible effects of reader comments are justified and well warranted. Especially negative and uncivil online comments threaten the perceived journalistic quality of a news story. Consequently, there is a need to find good solutions for managing comment sections in online news, and media outlets should consider ways to moderate, de-anonymise or remove comments to decrease the effect of negative comments.
Reuters provides an example here. In November 2014, the news agency removed the comment sections on its news stories to motivate their audience to move discussions to social media and online platforms. For Reuters, this was the best solution as those spaces offer “vibrant conversation and, importantly, are self-policed by participants to keep on the fringes those who would abuse the privilege of commenting”.
This does not mean that all outlets have to go the “Reuters Way”. Yet, they have to keep the effect of negative comments in mind. The alternative is sapping of their own credibility – an idea not too comforting in times where trust in journalism is already low.
You may also be interested in Germany’s AfD: With The Media And Against The Media.
Sign up for the EJO’s regular monthly newsletter or follow us on Twitter.
Tags: audience feedback, comments, Journalism, outlets, Social media
About the Author
Rana Khaled Arafat
Related Posts
What linking practices on Twitter tell us about...
Twitter’s design stokes hostility and controversy. Here’s why,...
The media revolution in Afghanistan
News consumers ‘prepared to pay for quality and...
The new tool helping outlets measure the impact of investigative...
October 22, 2023
Audit of British Tory MP demonstrates the power of investigative...
September 13, 2023
The impact of competing tech regulations in the EU, US...
September 12, 2023
Enough ‘doomer’ news! How ‘solutions journalism’ can turn climate anxiety...
August 31, 2023
Student perspective: How Western media embraced TikTok to reach Gen...
August 19, 2023
Lessons from Spain: Why outlets need to unite to make...
July 26, 2023
INTERVIEW: Self-censorship and untold stories in Uganda
June 23, 2023
Student Perspective: Job insecurity at the root of poor mental...
June 9, 2023
The battle against disinformation and Russian propaganda in Central and...
June 1, 2023
Opinion: Why Poland’s rise on the Press Freedom Index is...
May 17, 2023
From ChatGPT to crime: how journalists are shaping the debate...
April 25, 2023
Student perspective: Supporting the journalists who face hopelessness, trauma and...
April 13, 2023
Interview: Why young people in Bosnia and Herzegovina feel they...
March 29, 2023
Humanitarian reporting: Why coverage of the Turkey and Syria earthquakes...
March 8, 2023
How women journalists in Burkina Faso are making a difference...
January 11, 2023
Dispelling the ‘green’ AI myth: the true environmental cost of...
December 29, 2022
New publication highlights the importance of the Black press in...
December 12, 2022
The enduring press freedom challenge: how Japan’s exclusive press clubs...
September 26, 2022
How Journalism is joining forces with AI to fight online...
September 14, 2022
How cash deals between big tech and Australian news outlets...
September 1, 2022
Panel debate: Should journalists be activists?
August 19, 2022
Review: The dynamics of disinformation in developing countries
August 9, 2022
Interview: Are social media platforms helping or hindering the mandate...
July 15, 2022
Policy brief from UNESCO recommends urgent interventions to protect quality...
July 5, 2022
EJO’s statement on Ukraine
February 28, 2022
Arts journalism captures ‘the richness of being alive’, so why...
November 27, 2023
How a Swiss audience poll revealed strong reservations about AI...
November 10, 2023
Community radio: young South Africans are helping shape the news...
October 30, 2023
The new tool helping outlets measure the impact of investigative...
October 22, 2023
Audit of British Tory MP demonstrates the power of investigative...
September 13, 2023
The impact of competing tech regulations in the EU, US...
September 12, 2023
Enough ‘doomer’ news! How ‘solutions journalism’ can turn climate anxiety...
August 31, 2023
Student perspective: How Western media embraced TikTok to reach Gen...
August 19, 2023
Lessons from Spain: Why outlets need to unite to make...
July 26, 2023
INTERVIEW: Self-censorship and untold stories in Uganda
June 23, 2023
Student Perspective: Job insecurity at the root of poor mental...
June 9, 2023
The battle against disinformation and Russian propaganda in Central and...
June 1, 2023
Opinion: Why Poland’s rise on the Press Freedom Index is...
May 17, 2023
From ChatGPT to crime: how journalists are shaping the debate...
April 25, 2023
Student perspective: Supporting the journalists who face hopelessness, trauma and...
April 13, 2023
Interview: Why young people in Bosnia and Herzegovina feel they...
March 29, 2023
Humanitarian reporting: Why coverage of the Turkey and Syria earthquakes...
March 8, 2023
How women journalists in Burkina Faso are making a difference...
January 11, 2023
Dispelling the ‘green’ AI myth: the true environmental cost of...
December 29, 2022
New publication highlights the importance of the Black press in...
December 12, 2022
The enduring press freedom challenge: how Japan’s exclusive press clubs...
September 26, 2022
How Journalism is joining forces with AI to fight online...
September 14, 2022
How cash deals between big tech and Australian news outlets...
September 1, 2022
Panel debate: Should journalists be activists?
August 19, 2022
Review: The dynamics of disinformation in developing countries
August 9, 2022
Interview: Are social media platforms helping or hindering the mandate...
July 15, 2022
Policy brief from UNESCO recommends urgent interventions to protect quality...
July 5, 2022
EJO’s statement on Ukraine
February 28, 2022
13 Things Newspapers Can Learn From Buzzfeed
April 10, 2015
How Data Journalism Is Taught In Europe
January 19, 2016
Why Journalism Needs Scientists (Now)
May 13, 2017
Digitalisation: Changing The Relationship Between Public Relations And Journalism
August 6, 2015
Can Robots Do Public Interest Journalism?
February 11, 2015
The new tool helping outlets measure the impact of investigative...
October 22, 2023
Audit of British Tory MP demonstrates the power of investigative...
September 13, 2023
The impact of competing tech regulations in the EU, US...
September 12, 2023
Enough ‘doomer’ news! How ‘solutions journalism’ can turn climate anxiety...
August 31, 2023
Student perspective: How Western media embraced TikTok to reach Gen...
August 19, 2023
Lessons from Spain: Why outlets need to unite to make...
July 26, 2023
INTERVIEW: Self-censorship and untold stories in Uganda
June 23, 2023
Student Perspective: Job insecurity at the root of poor mental...
June 9, 2023
The battle against disinformation and Russian propaganda in Central and...
June 1, 2023
Opinion: Why Poland’s rise on the Press Freedom Index is...
May 17, 2023
From ChatGPT to crime: how journalists are shaping the debate...
April 25, 2023
Student perspective: Supporting the journalists who face hopelessness, trauma and...
April 13, 2023
Interview: Why young people in Bosnia and Herzegovina feel they...
March 29, 2023
Humanitarian reporting: Why coverage of the Turkey and Syria earthquakes...
March 8, 2023
How women journalists in Burkina Faso are making a difference...
January 11, 2023
Dispelling the ‘green’ AI myth: the true environmental cost of...
December 29, 2022
New publication highlights the importance of the Black press in...
December 12, 2022
The enduring press freedom challenge: how Japan’s exclusive press clubs...
September 26, 2022
How Journalism is joining forces with AI to fight online...
September 14, 2022
How cash deals between big tech and Australian news outlets...
September 1, 2022
Panel debate: Should journalists be activists?
August 19, 2022
Review: The dynamics of disinformation in developing countries
August 9, 2022
Interview: Are social media platforms helping or hindering the mandate...
July 15, 2022
Policy brief from UNESCO recommends urgent interventions to protect quality...
July 5, 2022
EJO’s statement on Ukraine
February 28, 2022
Working With Whistleblowers In The Digital Age: New Guidelines
May 3, 2018
Journalism Schools Thrive, while the Profession…
November 29, 2009
How Portugal’s oldest national daily switched to digital
August 23, 2019
Can a Journalist be Forced to Name an Anonymous Source?
March 13, 2012
The Economics of Business Journalism and Corporate Communication
February 1, 2004
Operated by
Funded by
Newsletter
Find us on Facebook
Archives
Links