The Usual Suspects : So, Mr. G, what did you do when you saw these abusive tweets?
Mr. G : Well, I scoured the internet for any clues as to the real identities of the people that wrote them.
The Usual Suspects : Oooh, that's a bit weird.
Mr. G : Why?
The Usual Suspects : Because nobody CARES who these totally random, uninteresting individuals are! No normal person would waste perfectly good brainwaves even thinking about them, let alone expend any energy trying to discover any information about them. OK, so what did you do then?
Mr. G : Well, after I found out where they lived...
The Usual Suspects : What, seriously? You found out where they lived? Oooh, that's creepy. And then what?
Mr. G : I went round to their houses to confront them.
The Usual Suspects : ARE YOU BLOODY JOKING? That's sinister.
Mr. G : But why?
The Usual Suspects : Because...look, we were all in total agreement yesterday that the Scot Goes Pop reader who took an hour out of her day to go to Ardrossan beach was a complete nutter, but what you've done is far, far worse. We're so creeped out right now, we can't even begin to tell you. Can we at least assume that it ended there?
Mr. G : Well, no, obviously I published the conversations I had with them.
The Usual Suspects : You did WHAT?
Mr. G : And also I published their real names, and lots of juicy personal details about them and their families.
The Usual Suspects : FAMILIES?
Mr. G : Oh, and I sent around a photographer to take unflattering pictures of them when they weren't looking.
The Usual Suspects : Wha...? Are you mentally ill? You need help, Mr. G. Have you anything at all to say in your defence?
Mr. G : Yes, as a matter of fact I do. My name's Graham Grant, I work for the Daily Mail, and the seven Twitter users I unmasked were all supporters of Scottish independence.
The Usual Suspects : That puts an entirely different complexion on matters, Mr Grant, sir. Your article was a must-read, and entirely justified in the public interest, no question at all. Our humblest apologies. Would you like a seat in the House of Lords?
* * *
PS. And, yes, I know that some of the Daily Mail's "Cybernat 7" hadn't even written anything abusive. One of them was Melissa Iacone, for pity's sake.
Aye fine, but Graham Grant is a journalist so is therefore a beyond-reproach battler for truth and justice against the cybernat establishment. Huge difference.
ReplyDeleteOnly Yoon - journos are the seekers of truth and all knowledge. I thought everyone knew and understood that.
ReplyDeleteYes, let's all use the Daily Mail as an example of how we should live our lives.
ReplyDeleteI despair of the Mail's behaviour, as I do of anyone who apes it.
Nobody has aped the Daily Mail's behaviour. Nobody doorstepped Spanner. Nobody published details of his family life. Nobody furtively took pictures of him.
DeleteBy the way, should I ape your behaviour by hiding behind the cloak of anonymity?
Anon : That was a cowardly post from you that I've just had to delete. From the tone of it, I wouldn't be surprised if you're the same person I had to delete two posts from on the previous long thread.
DeleteYou're welcome to post as long as you do so constructively. In fact, you don't even have to post constructively, as long as you don't breach the very basic rules in my moderation policy. It really shouldn't be as difficult as you seem to be finding it. If you want to make provocative posts, it would also be highly preferable if you don't do it anonymously.
Didn't the Mail once advocate a united Europe? Under a nice German/Austrian artist?
ReplyDeleteI cannot imagine what would improve this "newspaper"-----perhaps if they hired Brian Spanner to be their headlines editor--the man has a fine grasp of the old anglo-saxon, some might say at a level few of us can match.
Not sure comparing yourselves to the Daily Mail is a winning tactic, to be honest.
ReplyDeleteGreat news, Anon : I'm not comparing us with the Daily Mail. I'm pointing out that the Daily Mail went about seventeen billion light years further, and yet were given a free pass by...well, by you perhaps? Why are you posting anonymously?
DeleteHornet's nest stirred up big style.
ReplyDeleteWell done James.
Gonna need a truck full of popcorn .
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
Keep digging.
ReplyDeleteEvery "WAAAAHHHGH! CYBERNATS!" story is going to have the name Spanner in it now as Scotland wakes up and realises our journalists are anti-Irish bigots sniggering to themselves over the Spanners next women hating bon-mot.
We can't expect them to believe anything else after the titanic cover-up they are enacting. They must sympathise with his opinions. In fact I'd go as far as to say Daisley, McColm and Ross are all anti-Irish, women hating bigots and that is why they won't call him out on it.
It's strange but the Scottish press has got to be the most right-wing, reactionary press in the world catering for a mainly left wing progressive country.
Still, I'm sure the women hating, anti-Irish bigots like McColm, Ross and Daisley will prove me wrong by outing the spineless Spanner. Right lads?
Nah, didn't think so. So anti-Irish, woman hating bigots it is then.
And Al Murray, jeezo.
DeleteI thought you were doing parody mate, not just acting naturally.
After Spanner, I see I have been misinformed.
There should be less anonymity online, not more. That might raise the level of discourse on twitter out of the gutter where it currently festers (in which, in particular, women have to put up with an intense level of abuse).
ReplyDeleteIf Spanner knew his tweets would be connected to his real name, he might be a little less... vehement about the women he hates.
If it is Euan McColm I see no problem in bringing this fact to general attention. People should take responsibility for what they say and do. If, as some posters on an earlier thread think, Spanner has done nothing wrong, it won't do him any harm to have his tweets connected to his real name.
Well done to the Ardrossan sleuth.
On (off?) topic, Mori / STV have just done a Scottish poll.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3698/Scots-split-on-support-for-nuclear-weapons-in-Britain.aspx
They've only released the nuclear weapons questions. This is of some interest, particularly as they also did a GB poll using the same question method recently (split sample with two different questions).
I think it also implies Holyrood constituency vote VI. SNP on the now usual 50% or thereabouts. Also of interest is that they seem to have Labour still a bit ahead of the Tories, unlike YouGov.
I have a sneaking suspicion the voting intentions will still be coming - they'll just be waiting for that "Hi, I'm John MacKay" moment.
Delete