Want to tell Margaret Hodge, DWP Minister, what you think of her?

[two sheds]

Not doubting that she's been subjected to antisemitic abuse. Not doubting that it's horrific.

There are 25 pages of references to Margaret Hodge on urban alone. You saying they're all antisemitic abuse? There are references to paedophilia and support for right wing labour.

How many will be like this:

(Hodge is still a cunt, mind)

Fuck Margaret Hodge, but fuck Jewish Voice for Labour too. And I like Michael Rosen but he's got some serious blinkers on over this stuff.

I'm sure she'd include those in any messages she found offensive. What's wrong with you people?

 

[brogdale]

I think it's possible there could be more positions on this than 'yes, implement everything she asks for' and 'fuck her, she deserves it'

Agreed; it is worth discussing, then.

 

[killer b]

I'm sure she'd include those in any messages she found offensive. What's wrong with you people?

If I'd sent those to Margaret Hodge on Twitter dot com, then she'd be right to include them in her tally of abusive tweets she'd received. But I didn't.

 

[two sheds]

That's ok then.

 

[killer b]

Yeah I know. It's sending her (or anyone) violent racist and sexist abuse I'm not into, and I'm not into people justifying or waving away. We can call people cunts here all we like.

 

[two sheds]

I agree. This is still social media though.

 

[killer b]

what do you agree with? you're one of the people waving it away.

 

[two sheds]

It's sending her (or anyone) violent racist and sexist abuse I'm not into.

 

[killer b]

but you think she's exaggerating the amount she receives

 

[brogdale]

but you think she's exaggerating the amount she receives

Impossible to know, but we can say for sure that she's alighted on an unworkable, authoritarian mass infringement of liberty as the solution to the abuse she receives.

 

[Kevbad the Bad]

I despise you people. *

* This can mean anything you want it to mean.

 

[two sheds]

but you think she's exaggerating the amount she receives

I'm not sure that she receives tens of thousands of posts of violent racist and sexist abuse a month, although calling someone a cunt or saying 'Fuck Margaret Hodge' could be seen as sexist abuse so that could count too.

How many are actually abusive, how many relate to her poor handling of pedophilia and how many to her right wing views? We'd need to compare how many she gets with how many Corbyn or Blair or Cummings or Gove get.

Any amount of antisemitic or racist or sexist abuse is too much though. I'm in no way disputing that. I'd hope they'd be traced and acted on wherever possible. Ban the person from twitter for a start.

 

[killer b]

We'd need to compare how many she gets with how many Corbyn or Blair or Cummings or Gove get.

why?

 

[two sheds]

To compare how much is sex- and race-related and how much is just abuse of politicians.

What do we do to prevent it? I'd say any sexual and race-related abuse and you ban the users from Twitter (minor infractions perhaps for a week until they understand that it's not allowed any more). I'm not sure that would be tens of thousands of users in the first month though. Are you?

 

[bimble]

That is as naive and impossible as Hodge's proposal two sheds .
I don't write anything on twitter now and haven't for years (i just read) but when you click report on the most extreme actual full blown nazis - all you get, at best, is a message, often weeks later, saying 'thanks, the account you reported did violate our rules' and thats it.
A few really extreme cases might get suspended temporarily or even permanently but it is a game for them, they just reappear the next day with a new name.
Her 'solution' is never going to happen but neither is twitter or any other business which relies on selling its users to advertisers going to decide to employ an army of moderators in order significantly reduce its revenue.

 

[bimble]

Is she the one who's family made a killing in trading diamonds?

no. different oppenheimers. She's rich from her fathers steel business.

 

[co-op]

but you think she's exaggerating the amount she receives

This would be a pretty standard thing for a politician to do wouldn't it?

Especially that part of the political "centre" that overlaps almost completely with the news media, they routinely feed off these kinds of storms of 'abuse', and 'violence' and 'scandal' etc. Much of it is just plain made-up from start to finish, so just exaggerating the number and the tone is pretty small beer.

 

[killer b]

But so what? Does it change anything if the numbers are different?

It's tiresome making these comparisons all the time, but as she's complaining about more or less the exact same thing, did anyone here claim Diane Abbott was exaggerating? If not, what's the difference - you can be sure that people everywhere will have been trying to minimise and dismiss her complaint in a similar way - ah Diane, notoriously bad with numbers etc. Why not here?

 

[frogwoman]

Fucking hell, well done everyone.

 

[eoin_k]

Looks like she's accurate in this case though, per the article.

Research by Community Security Trust (CST), an antisemitism monitoring organisation, found there were about 90,000 mentions of Hodge’s name or Twitter handle, including retweets and shares, during October and November, though some were positive or neutral. It found that 22,000 individuals had been involved.

But that doesn't give any sense of what proportion are positive, or neutral, nevermind the negative ones that aren't necessarily antisemitic.

 

[killer b]

But that doesn't give any sense of what proportion are positive, or neutral, nevermind the negative ones that aren't necessarily antisemitic.

Maybe you should have a dig through her mentions on twitter if it's really important to you that she's got the numbers right. it's not much fun.

 

[frogwoman]

.

 

[frogwoman]

Im sure most were definitely positive or neutral. Jesus christ lol

 

[brogdale]

That is as naive and impossible as Hodge's proposal two sheds .
I don't write anything on twitter now and haven't for years (i just read) but when you click report on the most extreme actual full blown nazis - all you get, at best, is a message, often weeks later, saying 'thanks, the account you reported did violate our rules' and thats it.
A few really extreme cases might get suspended temporarily or even permanently but it is a game for them, they just reappear the next day with a new name.
Her 'solution' is never going to happen but neither is twitter or any other business which relies on selling its users to advertisers going to decide to employ an army of moderators in order significantly reduce its revenue.

Hodge is not the only MP (with publicly funded office staff to handle media) who has called for an end to 'anonymity' on social media.
It's no surprise that those who presume and choose to govern us perceive the advantages of closing down anonymised comment on their governance or representation.

 

[bimble]

Yep, i think donald trump wants the same thing. It's just not going to happen.

 

[killer b]

Got to wonder what value anyone is getting out of the current system though. The angry people shouting at Margaret Hodge this morning aren't going to get any satisfaction, and it's not going to make her miraculously change her mind. Personally I think the ability to be able to easily send abuse to people with zero or very low consequences is corrosive to both the receiver and sender, and I can't see much upside at the moment.

 

[bimble]

People must get some satisfaction out of it, else it wouldn’t be such a popular passtime.

 

[two sheds]

That is as naive and impossible as Hodge's proposal two sheds .
I don't write anything on twitter now and haven't for years (i just read) but when you click report on the most extreme actual full blown nazis - all you get, at best, is a message, often weeks later, saying 'thanks, the account you reported did violate our rules' and thats it.
A few really extreme cases might get suspended temporarily or even permanently but it is a game for them, they just reappear the next day with a new name.
Her 'solution' is never going to happen but neither is twitter or any other business which relies on selling its users to advertisers going to decide to employ an army of moderators in order significantly reduce its revenue.

No it won't be done by twitter or facebook alone, it needs to be done by law. They're fucking rich enough to employ people to protect the members who are most attacked. You'd presume they'd have bots to pick out the worst of the abuse and moderators to check questionable posts that are thrown up. As I say a week or two weeks for somewhat offensive to concentrate their minds up to a total ban for outright antisemitic, racist or sexist abuse.

Eta: they have a duty of care for their posters, put it into law and people can take them to court - a couple of high profile court cases establishing their need for duty of care and it will concentrate their minds.

 

[brogdale]

People must get some satisfaction out of it, else it wouldn’t be such a popular passtime.

People, often characterised as cranks, have always written to MPs; it's just an easier option with so many elected representatives now choosing to engage on social media.

I'm of the opinion that any elected representative paid from the public purse choosing to use social media as part of their engagement with their constituents should not be allowed to block critical comment.

 

[two sheds]

I wonder how Margaret Hodge would be treated if she posted on here. All be nice and friendly and not at all abusive would we?