People do seem to be more willing to disagree with each other on the internet, but that doesn't necessarily worsen the quality of the discourse.
People do seem to be more willing to disagree with each other on the internet, but that doesn't necessarily worsen the quality of the discourse.
One problem, though, is that the needs of these forms of communication aren't really the same. In a low-latency medium, for example, it's difficult to avoid strong structural biases toward both recency and immediate responses; these are both corrosive to the quality of the discourse. (I think these structural biases mostly account for the very low quality of professional journalism, but they are even stronger on e.g. reddit or HN.
pg and I have written some things about this:
http://lists.canonical.org/pipermail/kragen-tol/2008-January... http://paulgraham.com/hackernews.html (under "Fluff Principle" and "Comments")