國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Chapter 5: Discussion
This study‟s findings raise a number of important issues for discussion. As mentioned in Chapter 3, the addition of interactive features to the CBC website is relevant to the CBC‟s intentions for the interactivity, the fulfillment of the CBC‟s mandate, and the provision of an online environment conducive to a digital commons. The research findings will be discussed in reference to each of these issues. In addition, now that we have some understanding of what types of interactivity users are engaging in, we can discuss why these trends exist and how changes may be implemented to increase the interactive interpersonality at cbc.ca.
The CBC’s Claims
If indeed the CBC wishes to facilitate discussion and conversation as it claims it wishes to do, it would be well advised to re-examine its current interactive features. While there is no clear definition of how much interpersonal interactivity is necessary in order to “create a thriving conversation” (CBC, 2009b), the observed 70% monologic content and 76% 0-level exchange value in the comments sampled suggest that the to the extent that any conversation is taking place, it is anything but thriving.
One of the most significant, yet easily addressed, issues the CBC faces in its interactive features is the fact that those features are not clearly justified and their purpose is not spelled out. The best current justification for the features can be found in the CBC‟s submission guidelines. If it were to draft a statement of purpose for the new capabilities that web 2.0 functionality brings it, the CBC would be better able to guide development so as to maximize achievement of its online goals.
The CBC’s History & Mandate
While there is little precedent for the CBC‟s addition of interactive functionality, the preceding chapters pointed out that the tradition of regional and national radio call in shows does provide a model that we can compare the current interactivity to. These programs tend
‧
that of radio phone-ins is the level of moderation. Radio phone-in calls are pre-screened by producers and monitored in real time. This gives the CBC much more editorial control over what type of discussion takes place. Online commenting is subject to moderation by the CBC, but the sheer volume of comments means that such moderation has substantially less facility to monitor content. Further distinguishing online interactivity from that of radio phone-ins is the way that discourse takes place within each medium. Radio phone-ins are managed discussions where listener feedback and opinions are constantly accompanied by host and expert opinion. This allows the producers a greater degree of narrative control as they guide and interpret the conversation taking place. Online interactivity on the other hand has no central controlling figures beyond the relatively hands-off moderators. This leads to less coherent discussions and, as we saw above, a much higher rate of users simply leaving their opinions and not engaging in any discussion at all.It is this high level of what we can call opinion leaving that makes the new interactive functions so much different from the CBC‟s earlier roles. Never before has the CBC acted as a sort of forum where Canadians can so easily share their opinions on news and current events. Perhaps in order to remain closer to its history and to rein in overly negative commenting the CBC could be more hands-on with its moderation, in a way echoing the traditions of radio phone-ins. If the CBC were to host moderated online discussions about news issues it could mix the strengths of the phone-in model with the capabilities of online interactivity.
While new interactive features may be changing the CBC‟s traditional role, whether or not they help the CBC achieve its mandated mission is another question altogether. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the verdict as to whether or not web 2.0 functionality in its current form helps or hinders the CBC‟s mission achievement is somewhat equivocal. Allowing readers to comment certainly contributes to some aspects of the CBC‟s mandate. Item i, the stipulation that the CBC “be predominantly and distinctively Canadian” and item ii‟s demand that the CBC “reflect Canada and its regions to national and regional audiences” both benefit from interactive features. Users leaving their opinions offer immediate reflections of regional interests and – as the majority of users are Canadian – they are by definition “distinctively
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Canadian.” However, the new interactive functions do not clearly benefit other mandated items. As mentioned in Chapter 4, item vi‟s statement that the CBC should “contribute to shared national consciousness and identity” is not necessarily helped by these new functions.
These new features may in some small way benefit national consciousness, but the multitude of debates and disagreements about Canadianess suggest that they do anything but foster shared national identity. That said, many have observed that – to the extent that it ever even existed – unitary nationalism is on the decline (see for instance: Castells, 1996; Giddens, 1990). The contesting of Canadian identity that takes place in cbc.ca comment threads is a manifestation of the trends that have led to increasing diversity of identity. This increased diversity does not suggest an eventual decline and fall of nationalism, rather it suggests less agreement as to what it means to be of a given nation. Seeing as the debate about what it means to be Canadian is likely to happen online in one way or another, given the CBC‟s history it is fitting that it plays host to the debate. As the CBC develops its online presence it should note the importance of this role and try to ensure that the national discussion it hosts is healthy and constructive.
Item viii perhaps suffers the most from the new interactive features at the CBC website. This item demands that the CBC “reflect the multicultural and multiracial nature of Canada.” While a case could be made that a democratic commenting system will do just that – the preponderance of xenophobic, anti-immigrant, exclusive-Canadian type comments suggest that the exact opposite is happening. All of the stories sampled that dealt with either immigrants or immigration saw a surprising number of negative and at times racist comments.
This disconcerting trend represents the dangers of the commenting system. Those who leave comments are often those who have the strongest disagreements with issues in the story. It is safe to assume that the majority of readers do not leave comments. Rather, they read the stories and move on with their lives. Those who feel particularly outraged are more inclined to share their discontent by leaving comments. The result is that – although we can assume moderators cull the most offensive comments – there is still a high proportion of negative and at times inflammatory comments appended to the stories.
In order to deal with these discrepancies between its historical role, its mandated mission, and its new functionality the CBC would be well-advised to closely examine its
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
interactive functionality, justify its addition with a statement of purpose, and lobby for clearer mandated responsibilities relevant to the changed media environment.