The Canary, views and discussion...

[killer b]

The only saving grace is that he's so obviously not very well that I think nobody is going to take anything he says seriously.

That's not going to necessarily be obvious to an occasional or casual reader.

 

[kingfisher]

you are all right. there are no mi5 involved in london protest/squatting/online they passed the responsibility public order /subversion/ domestic extremism brief onto the #spycops units, and i think 5 are trustworthy so we should take them at their word.
ill reign it in.

 

[LDC]

That's not going to necessarily be obvious to an occasional or casual reader.

Possibly not. Even more reason for a ban. I dread to think what problems he causes in groups and campaigns irl.

One of the really annoying things about kingfisher is that they are really important and interesting issues about who has power and influence within groups and movements, and how this then ends up with certain tendencies and types of politics becoming more dominant and other ones becoming more marginalised. But his contributions detract from these discussions rather than add to them.

And I agree (at least I think I do trying to pick out sense from his writing) that there are for sure things worth addressing with (for example) the dominance of consensus processes and quite oppressive group facilitation, and who and what kind of politics and activity those type of processes benefit. And even when he alludes to the secret state funding political projects (almost entirely total bollocks) I do think the funding of political groups (the funding body/business LUSH springs to mind...) is a topic very worthy of discussion.

And although I'm not denying there's some level of secret state involvement in radical politics, the level he puts it at is way out of proportion compared to the reality. Far closer, more relevant, and more truthful are well meaning (and well heeled) liberals and manipulative lefties and the direction and impact they have on political movements.

And maybe that takes us full circle back to talking about The Canary...

 

[killer b]

Allowing kingfisher a platform for this kind of nonsense is damaging, both to the individuals here who're wrongfully accused (shit does sometimes stick) and to the arguments of people raising genuine concerns about secret state actions and the like, as their voices are likely to be dismissed as conspiracy fantasy along with his.

 

[kingfisher]

Allowing kingfisher a platform for this kind of nonsense is damaging, both to the individuals here who're wrongfully accused (shit does sometimes stick) and to the arguments of people raising genuine concerns about secret state actions and the like, as their voices are likely to be dismissed as conspiracy fantasy along with his.

so are the only people that can raise "genuine" concerns about the secret state merrick badgers lot.and you can call people rapists, wankers, but heaven forbid spies.
like it or not the mark kennedy era #spycops bleed into the occupy and post occupy via the meeting kennedy had in new york (with who? adbusters, what have they said?)
i have seen the (a) new methodology.
if this kerry ann mendoza,scriptonite,canary lady is a clickbaiting pseudo journo thats one thing but iv had a look in my emails seen who in occupy was promoting her etc, i could screenshot that.
but, i lived through this era. AND i have had PMs providing info, but in the end, what does evidence look like? that is what the detractors scream! evidence, well is there a form of evidence that could prove over this screen to screen technology that would satisfy you?
I promise i will not name any more people as spies, even if they have occured in some action that i have been at the centre of occupy/anal/sha/scat/sweets way/students/homeless kitchen/beak street and the rest, i will just call them "wankers" , wankers that slapped me on the back as i got arrested and increased my crim record while they planned and shook hands. wankers. no names.
you know one of the rainbows spread a rumour amongst the anti-frackers that i had done a crime, disavowed not believed, but still...
i fear i wont be around in 20 years to set the record straight, we will be left with the film "tense at st pauls". i was there, you lot werent, very strange things went on. sets of behaviours that i see repeated again and again. (definition of madness)
im sorry you take such offence on behalf of others (who do you know personally that i have slandered in such a horrible way?) -
and if the casual or occasional observer sees what iv written and thinks - hey,maybe they didnt get all the spycops, maybe these people are agent provacatuers, maybe i shouldt fight the police today, i dont see that as destroying trust. i see it as making people think a bit more, and perhaps staying out of jail, until they can go get all the masks n stuff, n then they can do what they like.
shall i post the people who were promoting KAM back in 2011/12 - but then it might be taken that i was implying something that i might not.
come for a few cans down camden lock sometime well put the phones in the biscuit tin and some of you 25 year veterans can explain to me why going beyond calling people wankers is verboten. or if its just verboten in this medium.
but please oh please do not ban me, excise my contributions, leave me a ghost, i will get a proof-reader on the NHS honest! -
X kF

 

[editor]

so are the only people that can raise "genuine" concerns about the secret state merrick badgers lot.and you can call people rapists, wankers, but heaven forbid spies.
like it or not the mark kennedy era #spycops bleed into the occupy and post occupy via the meeting kennedy had in new york (with who? adbusters, what have they said?)
i have seen the (a) new methodology.
if this kerry ann mendoza,scriptonite,canary lady is a clickbaiting pseudo journo thats one thing but iv had a look in my emails seen who in occupy was promoting her etc, i could screenshot that.
but, i lived through this era. AND i have had PMs providing info, but in the end, what does evidence look like? that is what the detractors scream! evidence, well is there a form of evidence that could prove over this screen to screen technology that would satisfy you?
I promise i will not name any more people as spies, even if they have occured in some action that i have been at the centre of occupy/anal/sha/scat/sweets way/students/homeless kitchen/beak street and the rest, i will just call them "wankers" , wankers that slapped me on the back as i got arrested and increased my crim record while they planned and shook hands. wankers. no names.
you know one of the rainbows spread a rumour amongst the anti-frackers that i had done a crime, disavowed not believed, but still...
i fear i wont be around in 20 years to set the record straight, we will be left with the film "tense at st pauls". i was there, you lot werent, very strange things went on. sets of behaviours that i see repeated again and again. (definition of madness)
im sorry you take such offence on behalf of others (who do you know personally that i have slandered in such a horrible way?) -
and if the casual or occasional observer sees what iv written and thinks - hey,maybe they didnt get all the spycops, maybe these people are agent provacatuers, maybe i shouldt fight the police today, i dont see that as destroying trust. i see it as making people think a bit more, and perhaps staying out of jail, until they can go get all the masks n stuff, n then they can do what they like.
shall i post the people who were promoting KAM back in 2011/12 - but then it might be taken that i was implying something that i might not.
come for a few cans down camden lock sometime well put the phones in the biscuit tin and some of you 25 year veterans can explain to me why going beyond calling people wankers is verboten. or if its just verboten in this medium.
but please oh please do not ban me, excise my contributions, leave me a ghost, i will get a proof-reader on the NHS honest! -
X kF

The point is that you CAN NOT keep repeating this same paranoid mantra across thread after thread and disrupting debate. Start a new thread and put it all in there. That's not a suggestion, by the way: it's a demand if you want to keep on posting this kind of stuff here.

And, no, no one is paying me.

 

[killer b]

Kerry Ann Mendoza isn't a state shill, she's a liberal who's confused self-interest with radicalism. You're just making noise - cover which genuine enemies use to hide behind.

You don't offend me because I have any loyalty to Mendoza and her ilk - far from it.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

What kind of twat calls their kid merrick badgers? Or is it made up?

 

[ViolentPanda]

What kind of twat calls their kid merrick badgers? Or is it made up?

It's made up, because Merrick Godhaven wasn't enough of a cunt's name for the the cunt.
He's a bit of a cunt, is Merrick - a bit of a whale's cunt, in terms of how massive a cunt he is.

 

[killer b]

You'd hope so: to call yourself a name like that would only be stupidity. To call a child would be stupid and cruel.

 

[J Ed]

I was talking with some people who recently joined the Labour Party yesterday and The Canary came up over and over again.

To be completely honest I feel even more angry about The Canary now than I did before. It is pretty obvious that the website is giving people false hope through crude kinds of manipulation. I tried to point out a few of the critiques of the website that have been mentioned on this thread, about the business model and the website's founder but this was met with a total lack of interest.

Perhaps I am just inferring too much from this conversation but I think that the website is giving people the impression that Labour is on the cusp of power and that all that is needed is to expose enough people to The Truth and that will be enough.

 

[DaveCinzano]

Perhaps I am just inferring too much from this conversation but I think that the website is giving people the impression that Labour is on the cusp of power and that all that is needed is to expose enough people to The Truth and that will be enough.

Flaming aviation fuel isn't hot enough to burn through El Corbo's steely resolve!

 

[killer b]

buzzfeed have done an article which may be of interest. Although Portland's decision to rule(d) out taking legal action agains the site on the basis that no one would take the accusations seriously makes me think there's probably something in it after all...

How A Viral Website Took Jeremy Corbyn Conspiracy Theories Mainstream

 

[Hocus Eye.]

buzzfeed have done an article which may be of interest. Although Portland's decision to rule(d) out taking legal action agains the site on the basis that no one would take the accusations seriously makes me think there's probably something in it after all...

How A Viral Website Took Jeremy Corbyn Conspiracy Theories Mainstream

As someone once said about Modern Art:-"There's less to this than meets the eye."

 

[Smoking kills]

The bird may have fell off its perch.

 

[cantsin]

The bird may have fell off its perch.

?

 

[crossthebreeze]

A quick look shows their website has not been updated since December 17th - and has no announcement of a break or a festive message on it either, their twitter accpunt is much the same.
Their facebook has been active though with a countdown of their most read stories and it says on their page they're having a break over the festive period.
So unfortunately probably not the end.

 

[J Ed]

A quick look shows their website has not been updated since December 17th - and has no announcement of a break or a festive message on it either, their twitter accpunt is much the same.
Their facebook has been active though with a countdown of their most read stories and it says on their page they're having a break over the festive period.
So unfortunately probably not the end.

Perhaps Mendoza is off counting her clickbait pennies somewhere nice...

 

[cantsin]

Perhaps Mendoza is off counting her clickbait pennies somewhere nice...

ignoring the shite Buzzfeed piece linked to above, are there sources / materials we can look at that back up your general scepticism re: Canary / their bus. model /Mendoza etc ? ( havent looked into it loads, but can't find anything via search )

 

[Argonia]

Is kingfisher dead?

 

[kebabking]

Is kingfisher dead?

Yes. Sad really.

 

[Argonia]

That's a shame, I quite enjoyed his or her posts.

 

[classicdish]

Is kingfisher dead?

https://www.urban75.net/forums/threads/rip-kingfisher.346844/

 

[MAD-T-REX]

The jaw-dropping moment Charlie Brooker character-assassinated Jeremy Corbyn [VIDEO] | The Canary

Canary offers lessons to Brooker on the real meaning of satire.

 

[ska invita]

... interesting analysis by Richard Seymour of The Canary...I'd say much here applies to The Independent too, even though the two website are different.

If you cant be arsed to watch it, basically the case is its clickbait: writers get paid by the click, so they produce clickbait, and it particularly does a nice line in spinning things so that lefties and liberals get to hear what they want to hear, despite it not being true exactly. The business model dictates the content. Oh and it turns out The Canary is very successful in terms of hits, and i guess therefore is making some money too. \Nothing shocking here, looks like its covered in this thread, but well phrased

Spoiler: video

 

[J Ed]

... interesting analysis by Richard Seymour of The Canary...I'd say much here applies to The Independent too, even though the two website are different.

If you cant be arsed to watch it, basically the case is its clickbait: writers get paid by the click, so they produce clickbait, and it particularly does a nice line in spinning things so that lefties and liberals get to hear what they want to hear, despite it not being true exactly. The business model dictates the content. Oh and it turns out The Canary is very successful in terms of hits, and i guess therefore is making some money too. \Nothing shocking here, looks like its covered in this thread, but well phrased

Spoiler: video

What I find a bit incredible is that there are plenty of people out there now whose worldviews are formed mostly by that website, in spite of how obviously shit it is. Perhaps it isn't that incredible, they are selling hope to worried and hopeless people who are desperate for it.

I was talking with some people who recently joined the Labour Party yesterday and The Canary came up over and over again.

To be completely honest I feel even more angry about The Canary now than I did before. It is pretty obvious that the website is giving people false hope through crude kinds of manipulation. I tried to point out a few of the critiques of the website that have been mentioned on this thread, about the business model and the website's founder but this was met with a total lack of interest.

Perhaps I am just inferring too much from this conversation but I think that the website is giving people the impression that Labour is on the cusp of power and that all that is needed is to expose enough people to The Truth and that will be enough.

 

[ska invita]

Perhaps it isn't that incredible, they are selling hope to worried and hopeless people who are desperate for it.

See Breitbart too, in an inverse/perverse way

 

[J Ed]

See Breitbart too, in an inverse/perverse way

I couldn't agree more

 

[Who PhD]

When she was blogging she tried to crowd fund herself a £25k a year salary and when that didn't work set up a couple of similar sites to the canary that didn't take off. She grew traffic for her blog by auto-tweeting every post about hourly from one of the Occupy accounts which she seemed to have control over and also from an anti-olympic campaign's twitter feed. She then had a brief dalliance with David Icke's project which seemed to result in a fall out. She also had a book publised on austerity, I only skimmed the part on welfare reform but it was full of sloppy errors. Politically she was, and possibly still is, committed to the zeigeist crap combined with a sort of vaguely liberal Corbynism.

tl:dr a blogger who got a bit of attention around the time of Occupy and the first wave of austerity and who's been desperately trying to monetise that ever since.

I seem to recall scriptonite had a donations function, that might seem distasteful to some, which is fine, but i'm not aware of anything more onerous. You weren't obligated to support her work. I agree that the Canary engages in strenuous clickbait and I agree that's bad. But I can forgive a brief dalliance with Icke if she's learned from that and isn't anti semitic or a believer in woo woo nonsense (or if she is that said beliefs are harmless). Anything else just seems like arguing with feet of clay.

 

[cantsin]

... interesting analysis by Richard Seymour of The Canary...I'd say much here applies to The Independent too, even though the two website are different.

If you cant be arsed to watch it, basically the case is its clickbait: writers get paid by the click, so they produce clickbait, and it particularly does a nice line in spinning things so that lefties and liberals get to hear what they want to hear, despite it not being true exactly. The business model dictates the content. Oh and it turns out The Canary is very successful in terms of hits, and i guess therefore is making some money too. \Nothing shocking here, looks like its covered in this thread, but well phrased

Spoiler: video

Always feel Seymour's a reliable source, so sat through whole of that, and his critique is basically :

• Uses same clickbait model as right wing press,
• ONE genuinely questionable story ( doctors suicide - he can f*ck right off quoting Wes Streeting re: the Portland Comms hoo ha )
• may have some liberals on board