Tolerance in digital media

Comments on digital news stories shouldn´t be either edited, removed or prohibited.

Although news media are legally alowed to do so - the contrary would represent a violation to their First Amendment's rights -, by concept, they wouldn´t be able to do so without being incoherent. They cannot silence the community and ask freedom of speech for themselves.

Also, it would be a great loss. When citizens contribute with diverse ideas in the digital platform, readers have access to them. It is enriching.

Of course, hatred speech can spread in the comments of news stories.

Journalists want to look for the truth. Hatred is real. Silencing it doesn´t make any difference: Racists will remain racist.

On the contrary, if people are exposed to that type of comments, they have the opportunity to answer. If mentality changes is not by silencing dissenters; but by listening to them and being listened, too. I'm not saying it, John Stuart Mill said it in his book On liberty.

I'm not saying it. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes talked about the marketplace of ideas back in 1919, setting a precedent on American common law.

Truth is self-evident. I cannot go through walls. Reality will impose itself in front of me. When readers face an offensive comment on digital news stories, they recognize it as offensive. And if they don´t, other voices can function as eye-openers because they have the opportunity to participate in public debate by writing their own thoughts.

Some will feel offended. From what I´ve seen, historical and social changes begin when somebody feels uncomfortable.