Last week we published a poll that asked readers whether comments (including anonymous) should continue to be allowed on HopNews. More than 420 responded, overwhelmingly voting in favor of keeping comments enabled.

Several readers offered helpful suggestions, some of which have been implemented. For example, we now include a reminder to keep comments courteous. We have also strengthened the way we moderate comments. Direct and personal attacks, vulgarity and off-topic comments are no longer published. This is a fine line for us to walk, because while we don’t wish to infringe upon freedom of expression, we feel a responsibility to keep the discourse civil. It is even trickier with elected officials and public figures, where criticism of them could be construed as a direct attack. In these case we are inclined to publish the comment. Elected officials knowingly sacrifice some amount of privacy when taking office.

On May 27, reader Amy Groves rebuked us for this practice.

In her comment, Ms. Groves wrote “How do we know that all the personal attacks aren’t coming from the same one or two authors who want to create a false narrative? Fake news can be very destructive to a small town.“

Her feedback inspired us to take a deeper look at those that are commenting anonymously. As readers know, anyone can use any name and email address they wish when leaving a comment.

Our analysis reveals that what Ms. Groves intuited is correct. There is one reader that has contributed an extraordinary number of comments to HopNews since early May, always using a different name. In fact, in one article this person represented nearly 30% of all comments, and in some cases they replied to themselves to reinforce their original statement, essentially acting as their own echo chamber. 

In some comments they represented themselves as a man, in others a woman. In one they add the title “LSW” (Licensed Social Worker) after their name; an apparent attempt to give their statement more credibility.

Because they use different names, readers may be left with the impression that a consensus has formed that echoes their opinion. 

Here is a partial set of their comments. Continue scrolling to read all.  

What is alarming about this is that so many of the comments are centered around town politics, and in particular one candidate for School Committee. We are left wondering if these helped shape the outcome of the election.

In broad terms, misleading comments and fabrications that cast local politicians or candidates in a negative light can sow seeds of doubt and division, eroding the public’s trust in the democratic process. Consequently, voters may make decisions based on false information.

Additionally, the propagation of “fake news” impedes informed decision-making and stifles constructive dialogue. When Hopkinton residents are bombarded with conflicting reports and baseless claims, it becomes increasingly challenging to discern fact from fiction.

Having one person contribute to so much of the narrative is akin to the well-documented Internet bot issue, which are created and controlled by individuals or groups with ulterior motives, and have the ability to amplify and spread disinformation on an unprecedented scale.

Our poll was a clear mandate: Comments – including anonymous comments – will continue to be allowed on HopNews. But whether we like it or not, Hopkinton is confronted with the very real threat of fake news and bad actors. This will undoubtedly test the resilience of our democracy. The HopNews team will try to do its part to be diligent in moderation, and we urge our fellow citizens to stay informed, remain critical, and actively participate in the democratic process to ensure that the voice of Hopkintonian’s prevails over the forces of misinformation and manipulation.