David McGoldrick on Robert Peston

[Rodley]

What sort of abuse do white footballers get?

Even if those involved are 12 years old, as has what has happened recently? Does naming and shaming stop this abuse? It will stop these people getting jobs which in turn could lead to more serious crimes, name and shame might make us feel better and the culprits worse but it doesn't solve the problem.

The companies should certainly be quicker in banning people and use more resources, and maybe ban certain emojis.

What I would controversial suggest is that people stop talking about. These scumbags craze attention, and love it to make people upset. So what do footballers do?

They go on TV and say how upset they are, and the cycle continues. I understand it's not easy to stay silent but that might be the best option for everyone.

These footballers can hire people to block people on their accounts in the meantime.

I’m not sure it’s really fair to say to Didzy “OK you’re getting racist abuse, but can’t you hire someone to block people who do it?”

I think the distinction people are trying to make is whilst all footballers get abuse for performances, there are players getting abuse for their performance and their skin colour, religion, etc.

 

[FMBlade1]

Preditors are targeting under 18s now and many get away with it because they are annonymous. They set up a fake profile and groom them. We need to protect the victims and not the criminals.
Who are the billoons of people that need to be annonymon social media ?

The entire populations of:

North Korea
Russia
Iran
Qatar
China
Hong Kong
Venezuela
and so many more

As for predators, the fact that Chris Hansen got cancelled tells you all you need to know about how serious people in power are about dealing with this issue. Also a sitting MP retweeted that the Rotherham grooming victims should 'shut up', with no consequences.

 

[Yellarbellyblade]

If you remove anonymity there will be safeguarding implications as predators can track down/threaten under 18's more easily.

There are billions of people who need anonymity, media companies even as large as they are won't be able to tell who does and who does not need it.

My view for what it’s worth is that if someone is abusing someone else online they give up their right to anonymity and that should be made clear in the site terms of reference

 

[Rodley]

Preditors are targeting under 18s now and many get away with it because they are annonymous. They set up a fake profile and groom them. We need to protect the victims and not the criminals.
Who are the billoons of people that need to be annonymon social media ?

Correct. If you don’t want to link your ID to Twitter, don’t use it. It’s not a mandatory requirement.

 

[FMBlade1]

I’m not sure it’s really fair to say to Didzy “OK you’re getting racist abuse, but can’t you hire someone to block people who do it?”

I think the distinction people are trying to make is whilst all footballers get abuse for performances, there are players getting abuse for their performance and their skin colour, religion, etc.

Famous people hire security guards to stop them being attacked, how is this different?

 

[bartman]

Asking for ID is racist apparently, like the Georgia Jim Crow laws being introduced currently by Republicans.

This is because minorities and/or people of colour disproportionately do not have access to ID. So requiring ID to get on social media, a platform for free speech, is arguably racist.

LOL. No ID ?. Why not ?How do they open bank accounts ,claim benefits, get mobile phone contracts etc. Nonproof of name and address?Social security ?. They are companies who can check identity in a matter of seconds now for a small fee.
Would these people be bothered about being annonymous on a Social media platform?

 

[FMBlade1]

My view for what it’s worth is that if someone is abusing someone else online they give up their right to anonymity and that should be made clear in the site terms of reference

I of course agree with that principle, but it's not practical or appropriate in some cases. What if the perp is under 18? Do we really set a lynch mob after them? A lot of these perps are these days as recent cases have shown.

 

[Edgar Allan Poo]

My view for what it’s worth is that if someone is abusing someone else online they give up their right to anonymity and that should be made clear in the site terms of reference

Good point but so is FMBlade1's. The Chinese government's view on what constitutes abuse and therefore deserves sanction may be very different to our own.

 

[Yellarbellyblade]

Good point but so is FMBlade1's. The Chinese government's view on what constitutes abuse and therefore deserves sanction may be very different to our own.

True but aren’t these sites already blocked in China anyway?

 

[Rodley]

Famous people hire security guards to stop them being attacked, how is this different?

You’re asking Didzy, Brewster etc to hire their own people to manage them being racially abused on Twitter, Instagram, etc. That seems unreasonable to me. Surely try and stop the racist abuse in the first place?

 

[FMBlade1]

LOL. No ID ?. Why not ?How do they open bank accounts ,claim benefits, get mobile phone contracts etc. Nonproof of name and address?Social security ?. They are companies who can check identity in a matter of seconds now for a small fee.
Would these people be bothered about being annonymous on a Social media platform?

Of course I agree with you on this:




I for one agree with voter ID for voting. If you disagree and think that's racist, you cannot also ask for ID on social media platforms as that would disproportionately silence people of colour and minorities.

 

[FMBlade1]

You’re asking Didzy, Brewster etc to hire their own people to manage them being racially abused on Twitter, Instagram, etc. That seems unreasonable to me. Surely try and stop the racist abuse in the first place?

Do you think it's unreasonable for famous people to hire security and bodyguards? Or should we say let's stop people from breaking into people's houses? How would that work?

(Really felt for Chris Smalling the other week btw)

 

[Yellarbellyblade]

I of course agree with that principle, but it's not practical or appropriate in some cases. What if the perp is under 18? Do we really set a lynch mob after them? A lot of these perps are these days as recent cases have shown.

Not a lynch mob but why make it so difficult for the police to get it so they can prosecute? I get that if the request comes from some authoritarian regime you may need some judicial checks and balances but as it is they seem to wash their hands of the issue. Of course they could be made liable for anything published on their sites that might be interesting .... look away now Foxy!!

 

[Cheesebored]

Is it not completely obvious what he was getting at?

Clearly not, that's why he's being asked for clarity.

 

[Edgar Allan Poo]

True but aren’t these sites already blocked in China anyway?

My point was that there isn't any kind of universal approach to abuse and abuse on social media or consistent approach to freedom of speech. It's a minefield that won't be cleared anytime soon.

 

[bartman]

The entire populations of:

North Korea
Russia
Iran
Qatar
China
Hong Kong
Venezuela
and so many more

As for predators, the fact that Chris Hansen got cancelled tells you all you need to know about how serious people in power are about dealing with this issue. Also a sitting MP retweeted that the Rotherham grooming victims should 'shut up', with no consequences.

The entire populations of:

North Korea
Russia
Iran
Qatar
China
Hong Kong
Venezuela
and so many more

As for predators, the fact that Chris Hansen got cancelled tells you all you need to know about how serious people in power are about dealing with this issue. Also a sitting MP retweeted that the Rotherham grooming victims should 'shut up', with no consequences.

Just to clarify, we are talking about Social Media companies confirming ID which is stored on their files. If any activity such as racial abuse, terrosism etc is published on social media the police can request this information of the person.
Social Media companies are abstaining their responsibility .

 

[Rodley]

Do you think it's unreasonable for famous people to hire security and bodyguards? Or should we say let's stop people from breaking into people's houses? How would that work?

(Really felt for Chris Smalling the other week btw)

I couldn’t really give a toss about famous people hiring bodyguards. But I imagine they don’t hire them specifically for fear of racist attack.

By return, do you think it reasonable for Didzy and Brewster for example to have to hire someone to manage their social media to delete / block people racially abusing them?

 

[mattbianco1]

View attachment 111646

No wonder he quit Twitter.

What a prick.

That's solved racism hasn't it

 

[FMBlade1]

Just to clarify, we are talking about Social Media companies confirming ID which is stored on their files. If any activity such as racial abuse, terrosism etc is published on social media the police can request this information of the person.
Social Media companies are abstaining their responsibility .

These people are being caught under existing legislation using the allocated resources and prosecuted. No-where near fast enough I agree, but removing anonymity will not solve this issue and will create so many more.

 

[FMBlade1]

I couldn’t really give a toss about famous people hiring bodyguards. But I imagine they don’t hire them specifically for fear of racist attack.

By return, do you think it reasonable for Didzy and Brewster for example to have to hire someone to manage their social media and delete / block people racially abusing them?

Er, yes people hire bodyguards for fear of racist attacks.

It's unfortunate and terrible for Brewster and Didzy to hire someone to remove abuse, but then it's also unfortunate and terrible for Joe Biden and Barack Obama to have to hire bodyguards and security to stop them being attacked.

 

[Yellarbellyblade]

My point was that there isn't any kind of universal approach to abuse and abuse on social media or consistent approach to freedom of speech. It's a minefield that won't be cleared anytime soon.

Me I’d turn it all off and get people to bloody talk face to face again (Covid allowing of course) but that’s probably my age. Joking apart though I do get that but as long as there are judicial checks and balances I think it’s doable. Things like is there an open and transparent legal system within the country would be a start. Companies clearly have responsibility to safeguard personal data but equally that shouldn’t be used to protect people spreading vile abuse or even libellous accusations. I don’t use my real name on here but if I started spouting racist bollocks, for example, I would quite rightly expect the mods to give up my details to the authorities

 

[Rodley]

Er, yes people hire bodyguards for fear of racist attacks.

It's unfortunate and terrible for Brewster and Didzy to hire someone to remove abuse, but then it's also unfortunate and terrible for Joe Biden and Barack Obama to have to hire bodyguards and security to stop them being attacked.

The Didzy / Obama comparison seems proportionate

 

[FMBlade1]

Me I’d turn it all off and get people to bloody talk face to face again (Covid allowing of course) but that’s probably my age. Joking apart though I do get that but as long as there are judicial checks and balances I think it’s doable. Things like is there an open and transparent legal system within the country would be a start. Companies clearly have responsibility to safeguard personal data but equally that shouldn’t be used to protect people spreading vile abuse or even libellous accusations. I don’t use my real name on here but if I started spouting racist bollocks, for example, I would quite rightly expect the mods to give up my details to the authorities

As many of these things do, it comes down to resources and money. Under existing systems and legislation we as a society can catch these scumbags. There are just so many of them.

Not to diminish what they do or the affect they have, I would rather the police spend their time investigating rising knife crime across the UK and terrorism and grooming than 12 year olds abusive Tweets to footballers though that's just me.

 

[Yellarbellyblade]

As many of these things do, it comes down to resources and money. Under existing systems and legislation we as a society can catch these scumbags. There are just so many of them.

Not to diminish what they do or the affect they have, I would rather the police spend their time investigating rising knife crime across the UK and terrorism and grooming than 12 year olds abusive Tweets to footballers though that's just me.

There’s definitely a balance I agree but equally if you broaden this beyond famous people some victims are driven to self harm and even suicide by this kind of thing. You can’t allow it to go unchecked just because the harms are more hidden unlike knife crime where it’s blatantly obvious. Society should be able to do both surely?

 

[Klaatu Barada Nikto]

As I clearly stated, 'to different degrees'.

Ched got abused by being called a rapist when in fact he was innocent in the eyes of the law and had served a prison sentence and was public enemy number 1 for years: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36930021 (BBC being polite in reporting)

He was hounded out of various potential returns to football before he was cleared, a fate that the guilty sex offender Marlon King was not subject to...

(In fact King even scored under the Jessica Ennis stand and she said nothing)

You can say that Ched's behaviour was scummy, I agree. To call him a rapist it for it, that's abuse.

The point is that Ched Evans got abuse for his actions, Players are getting abused for the colours of their skin.

 

[ShockingBadBuy]

I understand that people are rightly very upset about abuse on the internet but there are no easy solutions and it merits a calm consideration as far as policy goes.

I am staggered that clubs have not used this time to upgrade their stadium surveillance.

In the aisles there should be video and audio recording capturing every seat, so every time someone says something abusive they automatically get thrown out for life.

 

[FMBlade1]

There’s definitely a balance I agree but equally if you broaden this beyond famous people some victims are driven to self harm and even suicide by this kind of thing. You can’t allow it to go unchecked just because the harms are more hidden unlike knife crime where it’s blatantly obvious. Society should be able to do both surely?

Agreed, though I would argue we are doing both as these people are being eventually caught then prosecuted. Not fast enough of course, though again that's a question of resources. If the police on one day have 5 murders to investigate and Tweets which will take priority? Regardless there are only so many hours in the day.

 

[FMBlade1]

What's wrong with that? We have surveillance in shops and other public places, why not expand that in football stadiums to make it easier to catch people?

 

[FMBlade1]

The point is that Ched Evans got abuse for his actions, Players are getting abused for the colours of their skin.

Yes and all of it is deplorable, though as I quite clearly stated 'to different degrees'. Everyone is getting abused. What happened to #bekind after Caroline Flack? It only lasted around a week at most

 

[ShockingBadBuy]

What's wrong with that? We have surveillance in shops and other public places, why not expand that in football stadiums to make it easier to catch people?

I guess we have a different understanding of "calm consideration as far as policy goes".