Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Categories
- 1.5K All Categories
- 1 Site Stuff
- 31 Admin (FAQs, rules, queries etc.)
- The Boleyn Arms
- 34 General Chatter
- 7 Member info & Family Album
- 3 Radio Llama (music videos)
- 415 Fun & Games
- 111 BA Predictor Threads
- 34 Word Games
- 4 Quizzes
- 2 Pun Threads
- 299 Magic Minutes
- 3 Other Fun & Games
- 117 Current West Ham
- 200 Men's First Team
- 3 Women's Team
- 12 PL2 & Academy
- 32 Management & Board
- 15 Stadium & Training Ground
- 27 West Ham Miscellaneous
- West Ham Matches
- 401 Match Threads
- 72 MOTM
- 9 West Ham Nostalgia
- 35 Former Players and Staff
- 4 Past Games & Glories
- 37 Transfers
- 46 Transfer Speculation
- 87 Completed Transfers
- 55 Internationals
- 48 Men's Internationals
- 5 Women's Internationals
- 2 Youth Internationals
- 121 Football Chatter
- 43 Football Chatter
- 270 Other Teams & Matches
- 26 Other Players & Staff
Comments
Moojor this was the post he liked.
I also don't think Gold meant anything by it but at the same time it was a pretty stupid thing to do even if it was by accident. The original tweet however is pretty disgraceful imo.
Just didn't take the whole thing in.
It's a horrible tweet. I also don't think Gold read it or understood it properly. But people pointing it out is what remedied the situation. It probably doesn't need to be much more than that. The news articles are weird.
So many have got themselves into hot water over Twitter where literally everyone is an expert and can rebuke or even abuse you, I just do not get it
Authorities can use it to inform the public. Politicians can use it to misinform.
But for context, as a journalist, I wrote 9 articles for a major British newspaper over the last month and I don't think they got even 100,000 reads collectively. And the average time spent on the page was always less than a minute.
Over a three month period when I was in Sudan and my coverage was at its heaviest, I got something like 2.5 million views to my posts on Twitter. Honestly, that was astonishing to me. Before last month I was working mostly for niche, specialist websites and so generating interest was something I had to do myself. Twitter, in a way, flattens the way we get information.
There's good and bad. Even the idea of anyone being able to rebuke you has a good side. Yes it can mean abuse (and trust me I get it) but it also means that people who didn't have a means to challenge our established authority figures now do. If a politician lies, it can be called out in the replies.
Football fits strangely into the dynamic. It's ultimately a low-stakes issue which we all care disproportionately for. Discussions about it tend to passionate and not very logical. I actually think it's a weird way to follow football. It's strange how people think they need to directly address the players and the general use of Twitter isn't that suited because you can't really discuss anything with anyone.
But yeah, there are people who are into that. And Twitter's a big place where everyone can see evyerhitn but in reality you curate your own circle there so even though your speaking out into the open, it's effectively not all that different to speaking to the people who have chosen to listen to you because of your shared interests.
I personally don't use Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat (and whatever else app that comes along that people claim that they don't know how they managed before) for the simple reason that I'd never get anything done. :biggrin:
My own opinion is that while there can be a lot of advantages from being on one of the social media platforms, I think it can in some instances be like hiring a huge venue, filling it with people who hate you, and are nasty, and standing on stage inviting them to basically slag you off in the vilest terms they can, en masse.
Why would you do that?
You have to manage it. If it makes you unhappy, don't do it. It's not compulsory.
In the case of folks who kind of 'have to' have a presence as part of their job (as in the footballing example above), turn comments off .... get a friend/agent/PR company to run it on your behalf (it would be tax deductable :biggrin: ) or just, you know, say no. (As far as PL footballers go, surely none of them are that hard up for a few extra quid in sponsorship deals?)
No, but their agents are. :hmm:
It has also sometimes made existing things worth. Rumours spread faster. The type of tabloid hate that came before is now quicker and more direct. But plenty of people were getting hate mail filling up their emails before social media.
Regarding footballers. That is stupid. But I’m not sure it’s actually all that big a deal. It’s not like they have to do outrageous things to get their numbers up - in fact, they have to be careful about their behaviour because they know they can slip up and mess up their sponsorships.
It’s part of life and people have to learn to manage it. It’s still not as bad as being harassed by the tabloids. And actually, though it seems like you’re being attacked by an army of people, it’s not spontaneous. There’s usually a cheerleader who is prominent, the person or publication who opens the door to all the trolls with inflammatory statements or stories. That’s not new.
This comment is 225 characters long btw, how hard was it to read all of this?
Unless its an extremely selective form of dyslexia...
As for dyslexia Gold didn't mention it when he apologised so I think we can discount that as an excuse.
Social media as a whole is just accelerating existing trends at a massive rate and we have to work out how to deal with them.
Isn't there a balance to be struck with free speech?
It's not slander/ libel. It's not racist, sexist, homophobic. Personally I don't think 'being mean about somebody' should be a criminal offence.
Does this tweet, however unpleasantly it reflects on the tweeter, really stray into the realms of crime?
Probably not. I wonder if it is some kind of discriminatory comment to attack someone’s mental health in that way?
Edit- it's worth being clear about what is meant by discrimination, too, I think. Being nasty, insulting someone ... It's not the same as refusing to serve someone in a restaurant, or not hiring them, or putting excrement through the letterbox. :hmm: