In the article “Comment sections are poison”, Tauriq Moosa makes his claim that comment sections should be removed from the internet entirely or, at the very least,  strictly monitored. His disposition comes from his observation that comment sections are inherently evil and destructive towards women and minorities. I disagree with Moosa’s view that comment sections are poison because, as recent research has shown, comments are positive and instructional in majority. Moosa is mistaken because he overlooks all the helpful aspects of comments, including alternative suggestions that could aid the bloggers pursuit.

Beginning with an example from LiveScience.com, the site posted an article stating the health effects of alcohol versus marijuana, of course sparking a lively debate. Two commenters said:

“I’ve been smoking marijuana for 50 years, almost daily. 6 year successful naval service, 5 years in college with a masters in Nutritional Science and a 32 year career at a major university. My health is great. My mental and spiritual life is great. I’m lucky to live in Seattle. I can be selective and use a variety that is high in CBD and below average in THC. Life is good.”

“Lowered inhibitions? What a joke. As a recovering alcoholic, I’m not going to even gratify this article with any argument, just my thoughts on the subject summed up quickly: I’m sick of narrow minded people trying to find things wrong with weed. The only thing I agree with is operation a motor vehicle is dangerous after smoking.”

These comments offer personal accounts of people who have actually experienced the effects of both drugs. This is helpful, considering the author of the article could be writing according to estimation or minimal knowledge of the body, rather than first-hand evidence.

Secondly, FoxSports.com released an article regarding Jon Jones’ suspension from the UFC due to drug test failures. A couple fans responded:

“Sucks dude. Just plain sucks. For all the Bonesy fans out there, you let us down man.”

“He let me down, I was so looking forward to his fight with Cormier and he does this, I will still be a fan of his but I just lost respect for him.”

Since many MMA fighters admit to reading what their fans have to say, these types of comments could surely have an affect on Jon Jones while he’s out of competition. The remarks are not mean-spirited, yet critical, which could elicit a great behavioral response from Jones and help motivate his recovery.

Lastly, a Youtuber posted his cover for the song “Closer” by Ne-Yo. Responses were plentiful and of the same nature:

“You just melted my heart! :-)”

“Wow…..speechless”

These comments were in the majority and are certainly heart-warming and motivational to the singer. Removing comments from a video such as this would eliminate any sort of feedback; which is usually what the singer is looking for if they are posting their cover song on Youtube.

On the opposite end, Moosa believes:

“I’ve never really been a fan of comment sections and have often interrogated their necessity.” This shows that Moosa already refuses to give his undivided attention to the positive aspects of comments. If you go into your research with a full-fledged bias, it is nearly impossible for your mind to be changed by conflicting evidence.

“This is not only a high-minded opinion of yourself but also negates the entire 99.999999% of the internet that really does allow free rein to voice bizarre and bigoted views. (If the site really needed your opinion to survive, I assume they’d be paying you to writeatop the line.)” Many sites don’t rely on opinions to survive, and no one said they did. However, they are greatly appreciated and allow people to voice their opinions. This doesn’t consider commenters “high-minded”, rather provoked by interest. Moosa is too quick to judge the ego’s of people.

“It’s about time we combated entitlement by prioritising safety, solidarity and quality (as places like CreepyPMs do) over so-called “free speech”, that benefits only the loudest and usually most vile.” This response by Moosa is just ignorant and lacking much-needed evidence. There is no “special button” that makes the negative comments shine brighter than the positive ones. It’s a choice to the reader to recognize only the “vile” comments or all of them. If Moosa cannot notice the existence of both, his credibility is questionable.