by Kelly Hawes
I had e-mails last week from two people asking about our policy related to deleting posts from our community blogs.
Interestingly, both had to do with schools.
In one case, the writer was questioning our decision to delete a post calling for the demotion of three key administrators in Logansport Community Schools. The post made the argument that the local schools had been struggling for years to measure up to state standards related to academic achievement, and it contended that the administrators in question had been in place long enough to show that they were incapable of resolving the challenges facing the local schools.
It was a strongly worded opinion that no doubt would have been met with some dismay at the administration building, but that’s not the reason we deleted it.
Our online rules of conduct allow harsh criticism of public entities and public officials. What they do not allow are personal attacks or explicit name-calling. You can criticize the performance of a public institution and still be civil.
You can also stick to the point. It’s one thing to claim the mayor is off base with his proposed budget cuts. It’s another to toss in a snide remark about another member of his family.
Thus we deleted a rather lengthy indictment of our local school system and its administrators because of one or two sentences that crossed the line. It was one of only a handful of posts we’ve deleted in the 18 months or so since we launched the community blogs.
By the way, the blogger later went back and posted a shorter version of the original note, this one without the personal attacks. That one remains in place.
Some might still object to the opinion, but we’re not in the business of editing opinions.
A second note concerning blog posts came from a mother who wanted to know how far she could go in criticizing the handling of a disciplinary matter involving her child.
I referred her to the rules. As long as you follow the guidelines, I said, we won’t have a problem with your posts.
Our goal with the blogs is to allow members of the community to have their say on matters of public interest.
We don’t edit posts. We don’t go in and decide which sentences are OK and which ones have to go.
If a blogger steps over the line, the entire post has to go, and if a blogger were to continually violate the rules, we reserve the right to block that individual from posting.
So far, anyway, nothing like that has happened. To this point, no blogger has crossed the line more than once.
Lively discussion
If you haven’t checked out the blogs, I’d encourage you to do so.
Several bloggers have weighed in recently on the issue of standardized dress in the schools and on the national health care debate.
The discussion at times has been contentious. A post or two has stretched the definition of maintaining an atmosphere of mutual respect.
Still, as I said, our goal is to accommodate a lively discussion. We want people to feel free to air their views.
We just ask that they keep the discussion civil. We can disagree without being disagreeable.
And if we can accomplish that, if we truly listen to each other, we might even discover some common ground.
JAILBIRD tweetS
We continue to experiment with Facebook and Twitter.
I used both platforms last week to promote the fact that I was among the local residents who found themselves behind bars last week as part of a fundraiser for Jerry’s Kids.
As a result of my posts, several people went online to make contributions. Several others chipped in when I called and personally begged them to bail me out of jail.
Thanks to everyone who said yes, both to me and the other jailbirds.
• Kelly Hawes is managing editor of the Pharos-Tribune. He can be reached at 574-732-5155 or kelly.hawes@pharostribune.com.
