Post-Moderation The Pros and Cons

This blog post is part of a series on the different types of content moderation. Each type has its own set of advantages and disadvantages, and here, we will specifically discuss post-moderation. It's opposite is pre-moderation which is discussed in this pre-moderation article. Follow these links to find information on the other moderation types: reactive moderation, proactive moderation, automated moderation, and hybrid moderation.

What is post-moderation?

Post-moderation refers to the practice of reviewing user-generated content after it is published on a website or social media platform to ensure it complies with community guidelines. Post-moderation is less strict than pre-moderation and it allows for faster content distribution. However, this also means that there is a greater risk of inappropriate or irrelevant content. Reactive and proactive moderation are both types of post-moderation. An example of post-moderation is when a moderator reviews new posts after they have been published to make sure they follow community guidelines.

Pros of post-moderation

1. Cost-effective and efficient

Post-moderation reduces manual processing times for your moderation team as it allows content to be published immediately instead of requiring pre-approval for every post.

2. Increases user-generated content and engagement

Post-moderation encourages users to post more content as they are not required to wait for approval before their content is published. More content attracts more users and can improve user engagement.

3. Maintains the authenticity of content

Post-moderation encourages users to post authentic content that reflects the online community, and not just content that they think will be accepted by moderators such as in pre-moderation.

Cons of post-moderation

1. Delayed response to inappropriate content

Post-moderation can result in a delayed response to inappropriate content if it is not reported quickly. This can damage the platform’s reputation and discourage users from engaging with the community.

2. Risk of oversight

Post-moderation often heavily relies on its users to report inappropriate content, which can lead to oversight. Additionally, with the introduction of more sophisticated algorithms and tools to assist with moderation, it may become difficult for users to understand how content is being identified and removed.

3. Reduced control over the content

Post-moderation can reduce control over posted content as moderators would not review each post before it is published. This can lead to an increase in inappropriate or irrelevant content.

Conclusion

Post-moderation has its pros and cons, and it is up to the platform to decide which moderation approach is best for them. While post-moderation can reduce costs and increase user-generated content, it can also result in oversight, delayed responses to inappropriate content, and a reduction in content control, leading to a potential negative impact on the platform’s reputation. Ultimately, moderation should be a balance between allowing free expression and maintaining a safe and engaging environment.

FAQ

1. What is the difference between post-moderation and pre-moderation?

Post-moderation involves reviewing and moderating content after it has been posted, while pre-moderation involves reviewing and approving content before it is published.

2. What are the benefits of post-moderation?

Post-moderation can reduce costs and time associated with moderation, increase user-generated content, maintain the authenticity of content, and encourage participation and engagement.

3. What are the risks of post-moderation?

Only relying on post-moderation can result in oversight, delayed response to inappropriate content, reduced control over content, and a negative impact on the platform's reputation.

How Lasso Moderation Can Help