The positive side of online news communities

Open this photo in gallery:

I’ve written about the ways Globe readers can share their feedback with the newsroom in this space before, in September, 2023, and November, 2023. What has not changed since then is the Whac-a-Mole pervasiveness of those who seem determined to shock or offend with their comments.

Personal attacks – insulting or threatening other subscribers, public figures and individual Globe journalists – were appearing so frequently that moderators found it difficult to consistently tamp them down. In July, The Globe was compelled to send out a reminder of the Community Guidelines to all subscribers who had posted or read comments in the past six months. A few e-mailed me to say they thought the message was too much (it warned that “violators will be banned”), while others said they were grateful for the diligence.

So while, yes, online communities can be destructive, this month’s column is dedicated to the bright spots. They really do exist.

For example, hundreds of readers responded to a callout from Globe editors that asked: What’s the best ice cream in Canada? The resulting article was a collaboration between readers and newsroom staff who waxed rhapsodic over their favourite frozen treats, curated and presented by a team of editors. Since its publication online July 11, the article has been read by more than 80,000 people.

While readers have long been able to share their feedback and suggestions by submitting letters to the editor and in the comments section, collaborations such as this invite them to co-create stories with Globe staff.

In live Q&A sessions, Globe reporters answer readers’ questions in real time. Robyn Doolittle discussed the Hockey Canada trial’s not-guilty verdict earlier this week. In April, the Ottawa bureau’s Nojoud Al Mallees and Emily Haws answered questions about the federal election. And audience editor Moira Wyton worked with readers who responded to a pre-Canada Day callout, helping to coax out touching details of treasured possessions they viewed as patriotic or definitively Canadian. That story, which was featured as an A-section folio in print, was told in the readers’ own words and pictures (with some light editing).

Such interactive features are growing in popularity across the industry, as news organizations look for ways to build loyalty and trust with audiences.

In its 2023 “Predictions for Journalism,” Nieman Lab, a project that operates out of Harvard University, said news media should learn from the way online creators such as MrBeast (who, Forbes reports, has 634 million followers and earns US$85-million a year) engage their followers.

The report noted that “creators are making spaces where people get together to discuss and analyze the hottest stories in general news and particular niches. People spend only a few minutes reading the information but invest plenty of time watching and chatting with creators on Twitch, TikTok Live, or YouTube.”

Some media watchers opine that a lack of community can lead to news avoidance – and so perhaps engagement is the cure. “When there isn’t a community around you to help you make sense of the news together, when you don’t have people you can talk to, a social currency to keeping up with the news – it feels disconnected,” Benjamin Toff, co-author of Avoiding the News: Reluctant Audiences for Journalism, told participants at a 2024 journalism conference in New York. “It’s a chore that is going to make you feel bad and it isn’t really about you. Why would you spend your time with it?”

The Nieman Lab report points to the example of Puck, an American media company launched in 2021 by a former Vanity Fair editor. The report observed that, “Puck doesn’t publish regular news; they share in-depth analyses that people can read, listen to, or debate with their journalists through Zoom calls and exclusive conferences.”

Here in Canada, the Green Line engages its “hyperlocal” audiences in similar ways, said Kanina Holmes, a Carleton University associate professor of journalism who spoke with me from the Yukon on a video call. The Green Line covers issues in the form of “action journeys” comprising explainer and feature articles, a collaborative in-person event and the sharing of solutions that readers can use in their own lives and neighbourhoods.

It goes without saying that these media operations offer very different ways to catch up on current events than printed newspapers offered to our parents and grandparents. Back then, readers who wanted to share their feedback could submit a letter to the editor, hoping it would land on the desk of someone with decision-making power. At best, a dozen letters might be published on any given day, with no immediate way for other readers to indicate whether they had read or appreciated the submissions.

The advent of online comments and social-media feeds has allowed for almost unlimited volume and instant reactions (likes, replies, downvotes). But it created another problem.

“We have those keyboard warriors, trolls, whatever you want to call them, who are angry and upset and they feel the only way they can communicate and the easy way for them to communicate is to write hateful, often unconstructive things in a response to stories that journalists write. That’s not dialogue,” said Ms. Holmes.

In its best form, “an online community is a place where you’re not just consuming information,” Jacob Dubé, who recently became The Globe’s community editor, told me during a chat in the office. It’s a two-way exchange that allows audiences to participate in the journalistic process.

Audiences helped to shape The Globe’s coverage of tariff threats earlier this year, he said. “We did a bunch of callouts: ‘What do you want to know about what’s going on with the tariffs?’ We took all of those questions and we put them to our expert reporters. … And then we made sure that all of those top questions were addressed in a bigger piece.”

Ms. Holmes believes these community measures are good for journalists, too. “For lots of different reasons, some of it unintentional, we’ve put up these walls. And I think it’s hurt journalism,” she said. Audiences are great sources of story ideas. Plus, letting readers into the process allows them to understand how the work of a journalist is different from the content posted by just anyone with online charisma.

“We do explanatory journalism all the time but we’re not really good at explaining to people what we do in the work,” Ms. Holmes said. “So I think that would make a difference if we found more opportunities to do that – to let people in under the hood.”