191. People who comment on websites

On weekday mornings, with my coffee and toast, I read the Guardian headlines online. If an article takes my fancy I read it, and then, inevitably, the comments that follow. And that is where the wheels come off the cart.

If I think about it carefully, I would say that I probably know three or four people who might occasionally be moved to comment on a newspaper website. They are all sane and reasonable people, but they would be in the minority.

The particular psychosis/neurosis/rampant egoism of the commenter will differ depending on the subject matter of the article. Articles about books or publishing drip with the despair and disdain of a million failed writers, holed up in their grotty basement flats, hating anybody with more talent (or just luck) than they possess.

Film articles have a similar cadre of commenters, but this lot's despair and disdain is accompanied by a healthy dollop of pseudery, thanks, no doubt, to regular reading of Sight & Sound magazine.

But you never know when the real loons are going to appear. You know the ones I mean, because they exist in all walks of life. These are the people who think that nobody should ever be allowed to achieve success of any kind without IMMEDIATE and INARGUABLE reference to somebody who's done it better. They are the fun police. They are the voices inside your head wondering why you bother EVER trying to do ANYTHING.

They do a lot of sniffing.

My favourite recent comment followed the second episode of 'The Hour', which concerned itself with a FICTITIOUS newsroom's response to the REAL Suez Crisis. There was an overwhelming array of sniffy comments about historical inaccuracies but an alarming number of people chose to wonder in public why the writers didn't check their facts before the programme went to air. Anthony Eden was never the Prime Minister of this country! Get your facts straight! Outrage!

My second favourite occurred just this week, in response to the Guardian's review of the Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy film. Apparently the review contained spoilers, and an enragement of commenters let rip, until one lone voice wondered how it is possible to spoil the ending of a book that has been in constant publication FOR THIRTY FIVE YEARS. Not to mention the award-winning TV series.

But this reasonable view was ignored, of course, and they went on their merry, sniffing, outraged, hate-filled way.

Who are these people? And is this what the internet is really for?

Please leave a comment below.

PS - YES, I know it should be 'commentators' but I don't want to give them the pleasure.