Mail: a truly despicable article ("nothing 'natural' about Stephen Gately's death")
- Thread starter Badger Kitten
- Start date
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
i was asking why there's now a campaign to get moir or her employers to now retract the article?
Badger Kitten
oof
Have you been asleep for the last 4 days? It's all over the news, the internet, everywhere.
It's not hard. Google ''Jan Moir''. Put ''Jan Moir'' into Google news. Or Google blogs.
It's not hard. Google ''Jan Moir''. Put ''Jan Moir'' into Google news. Or Google blogs.
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
i know what she said in her column and i'm aware of the twitterised baying mob calling for her blood. but there's now a new campaign, it seems, to get moir to retract her arsedribblings or to get her bosses to do so. this is what confuses me, as it's pointless.
Badger Kitten
oof
The campaign you refer to started on Friday morning, the day the article came out.
See PCC code for what editors are meant to do when they publish inaccurate and misleading things - retract, and apologise. The Mail signed up to that code. Hell, Paul Dacre is the Chair of people who have signed up to it.
See PCC code for what editors are meant to do when they publish inaccurate and misleading things - retract, and apologise. The Mail signed up to that code. Hell, Paul Dacre is the Chair of people who have signed up to it.
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
Isn't Christian Voice just a one-man (i.e Stephen Green) mission?
gosub
~#
At the moment
Badger Kitten
oof
Yes, he's the Christian version of Anjem Choudary. With even fewer followers.
Can someone more patient than I about Jeremy Vine's outrageous bigot-magnettery give some sort of outline of what's going on with this programme?
(I can never bear to listen to his prog. Whenever I have in the past, I've found that the vast majority of people who phone in are ignorant right wing fuckwits, although I guess it might? be different this time)
Cheers
danny la rouge said:
I was going to pick up on this. When I did a quick and dirty search --under 'Jan Moir' -- of the Guardian/Observer sites earlier, I found NO article written by Jan Moir dated more recently than 2008. She was only a pretty occasional contributor anyway in my imperfect memory.
So one or two passing suggestions much earlier in the thread that Jan Moir was still on the Guardian's/Observer's books were in fact badly out of date as danny seems to have confirmed ...
Leafster
.
TBH, I've never listened to it before. I also have to admit that I wasn't paying full attention when the topic was discussed today and wasn't able to listen to all of it. The bits I did hear seemed to relate to others recounting instances of sudden death syndrome as opposed to any other aspect of the Moir article.Can someone more patient than I about Jeremy Vine's outrageous bigot-magnettery give some sort of outline of what's going on with this programme?
(I can never bear to listen to his prog. Whenever I have in the past, I've found that the vast majority of people who phone in are ignorant right wing fuckwits, although I guess it might? be different this time)
Cheers
It's probably available to listen to on Listen Again (or what ever it's called). It should be about an hour into the programme.
temper_tantrum
The beauty of the ride
A couple of links that you non-organising organisers might like to contribute to - before someone else steals your thunder ...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/pda/2009/oct/19/twitter-orchestrated-campaign-jan-moir
http://helpmeinvestigate.com/invest...-janmoir-jan-moir-campaign#inserted_challenge
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/pda/2009/oct/19/twitter-orchestrated-campaign-jan-moir
http://helpmeinvestigate.com/invest...-janmoir-jan-moir-campaign#inserted_challenge
>>Leafster : Cheers ... I'll let someone else take that burden on I think ... I'm far too Vine-o-phobic ... 
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
well there is something rather unseemly about it. there's a lot of sanctimony in the air at the moment.
temper_tantrum
The beauty of the ride
There is now a demo being planned for outside the Mail's offices, with nearly 500 people saying they will attend (via the Facebook group).
There is also a BBC journalist on the Facebook group asking people to contact her to be interviewed about it. Any takers?
There is also a BBC journalist on the Facebook group asking people to contact her to be interviewed about it. Any takers?
How prescient of Orang Utan!
I hope the mob will add another freedom of speech angle to the mix with a few c-words on their banners.
goldenecitrone
post tenebras lux
I want to see Muir's stupid head on a spike before the end of the week. That'll learn her about unnatural deaths.
And no sanctimony in Jan Moir's original article?
I know you're not suggesting that, or defending her, really, but your reaction seems to me to be a case of false equivalence.
As if the online reaction to what Jan Moir wrote is somehow equally objectionable to the article itself.
I really don't get why a widely shared antipathy to blatant homophobia can be dismissed as 'sanctimony'
You might have a point about this anti Moir campaign if being of limited effectiveness, but that's different surely ....
He's doing his grumpy old buffer impressions, BK, I shouldn't pay it too much attention...Have you been asleep for the last 4 days? It's all over the news, the internet, everywhere.
It's not hard. Google ''Jan Moir''. Put ''Jan Moir'' into Google news. Or Google blogs.
"
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
i just don't see how moir can retract the article. she obviously meant what she said, so if she were to retract, it wouldn't be sincere.And no sanctimony in Jan Moir's original article?
I know you're not suggesting that, or defending her, really, but your reaction seems to me to be a case of false equivalence.
As if the online reaction to what Jan Moir wrote is somehow equally objectionable to the article itself.
I really don't get why a widely shared antipathy to blatant homophobia can be dismissed as 'sanctimony'
You might have a point about this anti Moir campaign if being of limited effectiveness, but that's different surely ....
re: the point about sanctimony - maybe that was the wrong word to employ but there's certainly a whiff of it in many people's posts and published articles. i'm not keen on people thinking they're the bees knees and slapping themselves on the back for being tireless anti-prejudice campaigners just cos they've joined a facebook group.
john x
Well-Known Member
That is the problem with this thread.
While no doubt a noble cause and an interesting case of how quickly information can be spread and campaign organised over the internet, there are other things going on in the world.
While I can understand people getting over-excited when stuff like this happens, there does seem to be a disturbing tendency to turn on anyone who isn't caught up in that excitement and accuse them of everything from being unsupportive of the to cause to being in league with the forces of homophobia.
People who have spoken from a position of practical experience with the media have been shouted down for being unduly negative, and people who have pointed out the irony of misogynist attacks on Jan Moir on an anti-homophobic thread, have been told not to spoil the party and to go elsewhere.
Jan Moir should be criticised because she is a bigot, not because she is a woman. What place do sentiments like 'Burn the Witch' 'fat bitch' and 'She is a cunt and a bitch' have on a thread opposing homophobia?
And while in no way questioning the sincerity of most of those on this thread who have participated in the 'campaign', there is a certain amount of 'look at me! I am wonderful' going on, that does make one wonder.
john x
Badger Kitten
oof
1. Orang Outang was asking what had happened; well how about reading the thread he was commenting on?
2. How interesting that you see 'backslapping' John X. I don't see that at all. I do see people being pleased by the extraordinary response. And rightly so, why not?
Also this: 'While I can understand people getting over-excited when stuff like this happens, there does seem to be a disturbing tendency to turn on anyone who isn't caught up in that excitement and accuse them of everything from being unsupportive of the to cause to being in league with the forces of homophobia'.
Any actual examples of this? Or are you just projecting stuff?
3. 'Jan Moir should be criticised because she is a bigot, not because she is a woman. What place do sentiments like 'Burn the Witch' 'fat bitch' and 'She is a cunt and a bitch' have on a thread opposing homophobia?' Quite agree, however, I can't control what other people say or write. In a large group of people, soem will swear and say bad things.
4. Finally, for all the carping from a few people, I stand by the fact that I think this is an extraordinary thing that is happening. The advertisers have pulled - a first. The Mail's standard bigotry and homophobia is being widely discussed and challenged. Thousands and thousands of people have spoken out against it. Media commentators, publishers, journalists, advertisers, marketers are all taking notice. If people with self-claimed 'media expertise' haven't noticed that this is a big industry/media story, I'm genuinely surprised. Because it is.
Nobody is saying it is the only thing in the world, so don't try that straw man. And if it doesn't interest you, feel free to go and read/do something else.
2. How interesting that you see 'backslapping' John X. I don't see that at all. I do see people being pleased by the extraordinary response. And rightly so, why not?
Also this: 'While I can understand people getting over-excited when stuff like this happens, there does seem to be a disturbing tendency to turn on anyone who isn't caught up in that excitement and accuse them of everything from being unsupportive of the to cause to being in league with the forces of homophobia'.
Any actual examples of this? Or are you just projecting stuff?
3. 'Jan Moir should be criticised because she is a bigot, not because she is a woman. What place do sentiments like 'Burn the Witch' 'fat bitch' and 'She is a cunt and a bitch' have on a thread opposing homophobia?' Quite agree, however, I can't control what other people say or write. In a large group of people, soem will swear and say bad things.
4. Finally, for all the carping from a few people, I stand by the fact that I think this is an extraordinary thing that is happening. The advertisers have pulled - a first. The Mail's standard bigotry and homophobia is being widely discussed and challenged. Thousands and thousands of people have spoken out against it. Media commentators, publishers, journalists, advertisers, marketers are all taking notice. If people with self-claimed 'media expertise' haven't noticed that this is a big industry/media story, I'm genuinely surprised. Because it is.
Nobody is saying it is the only thing in the world, so don't try that straw man. And if it doesn't interest you, feel free to go and read/do something else.
john x
Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by Badger Kitten
1. Orang Outang was asking what had happened; well how about reading the thread he was commenting on?
The thread I've posted over 50 times on?
2. How interesting that you see 'backslapping' John X. I don't see that at all. I do see people being pleased by the extraordinary response. And rightly so, why not?
Being pleased is one thing, saying 'look at me I'm wonderful' does make you wonder.
Also this: 'While I can understand people getting over-excited when stuff like this happens, there does seem to be a disturbing tendency to turn on anyone who isn't caught up in that excitement and accuse them of everything from being unsupportive of the to cause to being in league with the forces of homophobia'.
Any actual examples of this? Or are you just projecting stuff?
Plenty of examples in the last 40 pages or so.
3. 'Jan Moir should be criticised because she is a bigot, not because she is a woman. What place do sentiments like 'Burn the Witch' 'fat bitch' and 'She is a cunt and a bitch' have on a thread opposing homophobia?' Quite agree, however, I can't control what other people say or write. In a large group of people, soem will swear and say bad things.
Nobody is saying you can control it. The point I was making was about how these comments went largely unchallenged on a thread about homophobia.
4. Finally, for all the carping from a few people, I stand by the fact that I think this is an extraordinary thing that is happening. The advertisers have pulled - a first. The Mail's standard bigotry and homophobia is being widely discussed and challenged. Thousands and thousands of people have spoken out against it. Media commentators, publishers, journalists, advertisers, marketers are all taking notice. If people with self-claimed 'media expertise' haven't noticed that this is a big industry/media story, I'm genuinely surprised. Because it is.
Nobody is disagreeing with that.
Nobody is saying it is the only thing in the world, so don't try that straw man. And if it doesn't interest you, feel free to go and read/do something else.
Kind of proves my point
john x
1. Orang Outang was asking what had happened; well how about reading the thread he was commenting on?
The thread I've posted over 50 times on?
2. How interesting that you see 'backslapping' John X. I don't see that at all. I do see people being pleased by the extraordinary response. And rightly so, why not?
Being pleased is one thing, saying 'look at me I'm wonderful' does make you wonder.
Also this: 'While I can understand people getting over-excited when stuff like this happens, there does seem to be a disturbing tendency to turn on anyone who isn't caught up in that excitement and accuse them of everything from being unsupportive of the to cause to being in league with the forces of homophobia'.
Any actual examples of this? Or are you just projecting stuff?
Plenty of examples in the last 40 pages or so.
3. 'Jan Moir should be criticised because she is a bigot, not because she is a woman. What place do sentiments like 'Burn the Witch' 'fat bitch' and 'She is a cunt and a bitch' have on a thread opposing homophobia?' Quite agree, however, I can't control what other people say or write. In a large group of people, soem will swear and say bad things.
Nobody is saying you can control it. The point I was making was about how these comments went largely unchallenged on a thread about homophobia.
4. Finally, for all the carping from a few people, I stand by the fact that I think this is an extraordinary thing that is happening. The advertisers have pulled - a first. The Mail's standard bigotry and homophobia is being widely discussed and challenged. Thousands and thousands of people have spoken out against it. Media commentators, publishers, journalists, advertisers, marketers are all taking notice. If people with self-claimed 'media expertise' haven't noticed that this is a big industry/media story, I'm genuinely surprised. Because it is.
Nobody is disagreeing with that.
Nobody is saying it is the only thing in the world, so don't try that straw man. And if it doesn't interest you, feel free to go and read/do something else.
Kind of proves my point
john x
Well I have been away being busy & missed it all going postal until this morning. Last I saw was a little bit of a stir on friday.
I'm not interested enough tbh, to read all the in & outs, but from my uninformed fence, it does rather seem that your FB page, all the twittering & whatever else have done exactly what everyone was lambasting the DM for doing over Brand & Ross. I don't know what your position on that was personally BK, but this whole thing smacks of the same outrage by proxy as that one. I'm kinda with OU on this.
(The Guardian's looking very silly as well imo, it's glee at some juicy "payback" reporting, barely hidden)
Gay Diana springs to mind.
john x
Well-Known Member
What it reminds me of is the car thief in america who was caught after the owner of the stolen car posted on a car enthusiast website.
The search went global and the guy was eventually caught. A couple of people on here linked to it (pK was definitely one of them) and got very excited. When someone pointed out the amount of racist, homophobic, misogynist and anti-disabled shit that polluted the thread (the car enthusiast web-site was mainly used by white, teenage boys) they were shouted down among claims that this was the greatest thing in the history of the internet.
While the 'Jan Moir campaign' is infinitely more worthy than one which basically returned a stolen car to some dodgy car dealer, there is a certain similarity in the 'tolerate no criticism' aspects of both cases.
john x
gosub
~#
Both Stephen Gately's husband and his mother have spoken publically about his death.
Google currently associates 120 articles with that, 810 with Jan Moir's article, just from today
Google currently associates 120 articles with that, 810 with Jan Moir's article, just from today
quimcunx
imprimeo, lamino, distribuo
You mean you said you thought calling moir a bitch was sexist and someone else disagreed with you and everyone else just got on with what they were doing rather than have the thread derailed by an argument that's been had over and over again elsewhere.
Personally I have no problem with her being called a bitch. I don't find it sexist. It is insulting, but it is meant to be. Burn the witch stuff is just childish and I've not much time for it but not bothered by it really. It's not like it was said in sincerity.
This has been a pretty thoughtful thread. Yes there has been a lot of buoyed up enthusiasm which has carried it along. That doesn't mean people aren't aware that results might be limited and some actions might be of less use than others, but for example nick h voiced his scepticism and retracted later when he saw the results. We don't know what will come out of this. We're trying to go as far as we can with what we have. Nothing wrong with a little optimism and enthusiasm.
trashpony
Hag
I think it's very easy to sit back and read a thread like this from start to finish and conclude it's self-congratulatory. I think it's more amazement that so many people were as appalled by the article and we were all galvanised by a need to do something. I've had the Mary Whitehouse argument on another board and tbh I don't think it really holds water. But of course you're all entitled to your opinion. I think the article crossed a line and made statements which were blatantly untrue and it was horribly homophobic. I don't want to read that kind of crap in any national paper. And I don't think the fact that she was 'expressing an opinion' is a valid challenge. If were okay for everyone to use our public media to express whatever twisted views they happened to hold, no one would have an issue with Nick Griffen going on Question Time. Or the National Front could have their own TV channel because it's just expressing their views. I believe that freedom of speech should be balanced by freedom for individuals from all sectors of the community to live their lives without abuse being hurled at them because of their sexuality/race/religion/gender, whether that be face to face, on print, on tv or on the internet.
Similar threads
