Dear friends and critics, I care a lot about what our supporters think. I read most of the comments on our Facebook posts and I try to take in as many as I can.
Your notes shape what we publish and how we improve. I’m always looking for clear critiques, specific feedback, and ideas we should cover next.
But a word to the folks who dislike our work and drop in to say so: substance gets my attention more than one-liners.
If you arrive in good faith, even if you can’t stand us, and lay out a grounded critique, I will read it closely. You don’t need to agree with us. You just need to bring reasons, examples, and sources. Even a one sentence suggestion that proposes an alternative with specifics can go miles.
That said, I still read plenty of hostile comments and sometimes reply.
Responding to counter-arguments helps keep my own mind and thinking sharp.
The hard part is that many drive-by posts boil down to “this is BS,” or personal insults without anything meaningful to chew on. I often respond to these one-liners with a simple request: cite one inaccuracy, share a source, and I will correct it. Almost no one takes that step.
If you want your pushback to be useful, here’s a quick guide:
- Point to a specific claim or paragraph. Quote it.
- Explain what’s wrong and why. Keep it concise.
- Share at least one credible source readers can check.
- Offer a better frame, fact, or policy so we can compare.
- Keep the tone friendly, or at least accompany your unfriendly response with some supporting evidence.
- Try turning what you were gonna say into a suggestion: "I'd like to see you post more about ___" and bonus: share a link to an article or video you'd like us to share!
Remember: I'm actively reading comments looking for feedback from our genuine supporters, those allied with our shared goals and values.
If you present yourself as a friend, and offer sincere feedback on how we can improve, I'll take your feedback seriously.
If you introduce yourself as an "enemy," openly waging warfare against us, I might still respond and try to learn what I can from your comment, but it's harder to take feedback seriously from folks who, for lack of a better term, act like trolls or status quo warriors.
To clarify: not all antagonists act like trolls. I regularly encounter good-faith and well-reasoned critiques from opponents. The problem is these responses are still far in the minority.
For those new to Films For Action, our goal is to create a society that values people, democracy and a healthy planet over corporate and imperial rule.
That should offer a pretty broad base for our common interests, aside from the folks that actively defend the latter. The question comes down to all the details.
What does a society that values life, democracy, people and the planet look like, rather than a society that protects concentrated private power?
What policies and changes will help us get there? Unless you love the status quo, we all want change. The question is how and what.
Disagreement is healthy, and there's plenty of room for a diversity of perspectives. As an editor and director for this project, I aim to share a diversity of perspectives, rooted within our shared values, even stuff I personally disagree with here or there.
So for the critics who visit our page who care about changing minds, just know you'll be more persuasive if you share your stance with a bit of old-school friendliness.
Pretend we're a friend and we're hanging out in our living room and we'll do our best to do the same. Very few people are willing to entertain a guest in their house that's openly hostile. I try to have patience with our regular guest antagonists, but eventually I do block the folks that repeatedly come here to wage war rather than have a conversation between fellow human beings.
When status quo warriors spam our Facebook page with partisan memes or act belligerent right out of the gate, I block immediately for the sake of maintaining a semi-decent space for conversation there, but it's something I could definitely do a better job keeping tabs on. I'm too patient with the trolls for some!
But yeah, to everyone who shows up with care, whether you support us or oppose us, thank you!
Your efforts help make the internet a slightly less insufferable place to be! Haha.
Ultimately, if we can bring our best selves to the conversation, that helps others do the same.
We've all been baited into unproductive online arguments and fallen short of our own ideals. I know I have! I also know I'll fall short of these ideals again in the future. Engaging online feels like a warzone sometimes, but I'm committed to the effort.
To those who have called us stupid or other names in the past, help us by leading by example! Show us your wisdom by instead offering patience, kindness and a better argument.
Cheers!
Tim Hjersted
Films For Action
Want to reply? Readers can comment on the original Facebook post here.
PS:
This post was inspired by reading hundreds of comments from folks that either see us as the enemy or are just assuming I don't care what they think or I won't listen, so they go on the offensive and don't even consider that they could speak to me as a friend and offer their feedback as a suggestion or thought that would be considered.
This kind of models a thought I've had about a lot of activism too: usually people expect city officials to be oppositional, so activism starts out oppositional from the start, but this often escalates tension and conflict unnecessarily, making decision makers more resistant to change. The more productive approach would be to approach city officials as friends, encouraging the kind of changes you want to see, and seeing what kind of collaboration becomes possible. If they stall, oppose you or make it clear they're going to keep defending business as usual, then move to the traditional adversarial pressure tactics.
Another critique I got after posting the letter above was that “those who might read this probably already practice these values and those who need to read it won't, so what's the point?"
On the former point, I can speak from experience that this is frequently and unfortunately not the case. While progressives tend to respond more thoughtfully, I encounter plenty of insults and trollish behavior from folks I otherwise agree with more than not. For instance, I used to see mainly conservatives weaponizing the laugh emoji as a tool of derision on Facebook and now I see almost everyone use it. I also see progressives respond with insults, harsh judgments, a lack of charitable assumptions, or snark, and I've not lived up to my own advice plenty of times in the past, too, as I mentioned in the note.
So this letter isn't just for “the trolls.” It's a reminder to all who care about this stuff to recommit, to strive to bring our best selves when we have the inner resources for it, even though the hostile nature of the internet often brings out the worst in all of us sometimes. No one is perfect and it's understandable to have zero patience “with BS” sometimes. I hold no fault towards anyone who has written an angry or hostile comment towards those we strongly oppose. But the goal in my mind is to just make a more charitable effort when we have the resources for it.
With that in mind, this post is a way to help set some house rules in public, so the people who want a real exchange know how to get my attention and so regular readers know what kind of conversation we’re trying to cultivate. Norms work best when they’re visible.
Third, to reiterate: I don't consider antagonist as a synonym for troll. By antagonist I mean someone who disagrees with our project or politics. Many do that in good faith. A troll is about behavior: drive-by insults, partisan spam, zero engagement with what was actually written. Bad faith projections that twist reality. Calling us a “commie!” in response to calls for public investment in programs that help people. Or “you love Hamas” and “support terrorism” in response to basic calls to hold the war criminals in our governments accountable.
I don't consider everyone who disagrees with me to be a troll or status quo warrior. I reserve that label for those that are a bit more extreme with their rhetoric and behavior.
On finding value in messy, short or angry comments, I completely agree.
I try to pull value from every comment. I consider it a responsibility of the speaker to speak in a language the listener can understand, so if a message sparks strong reactions or misunderstandings, I do see it as a sign the message could be refined or reframed.
Tim Hjersted is the director and co-founder of Films For Action, an online library for people who want to change the world. He is also the main admin of Films For Action's Facebook page.