To think the Daily Mail are taking the piss?

[DailyFailAreABunchOfCunts]

As you may infer from my NN I am not a fan. However I saw this on today's Mail online:

DM Link

For those who don't want to click it, the DM have mined the recent thread from a poster who lost her DS at a young age, and was asking if she WBU to still buy clothes for him and join clubs. I remember the thread as it was really moving and so clear that the poster was struggling with her grief.

The Mail has lifted the story - and the child's name - lock, stock and barrel. I'd be interested in MNHQ's view on this. I realise that posts are in the public domain but this feels so horribly invasive.

[CoolforKittyCats]

It is horrible, but unfortunately this is the risk you run when you post on public forums.

[LittleLionMansMummy]

Fuck sake. That's plumbing new depths even for the DM. I also fail to see how it's 'newsworthy'.

[Vixxfacee]

Out of order. I am sure if someone she knows reads that then would know it was her.

[VioletTea]

Bastards.

[ParanoidGynodroid]

There is another thread about this, already. YADNBU though. Bastards.

[Elle80]

I've just seen this. I thought the DM online couldn't sink any lower

[HackerFucker22]

To be honest I think you should have just directed MNHQ to the article as opposed to reposting it here.

It's a vile thing to do but probably legal.

Don't give them any publicity!!!

[DailyFailAreABunchOfCunts]

Sorry - I checked in Active to see if anyone else had picked this up already. Am so bloody mad. I have also posted in Site Stuff to see if MNHQ will comment.

Even for the DM this feels like a new bloody low. I doubt anyone asked the poster if she was OK with her grief being used to generate clicks on their website.

[RaeSkywalker]

This is absoloutely disgusting. I know it's a public forum but I'm sick of lazy bloody journalists doing this kind of thing. The poor woman came to MN for support and now her child's name is on the DM website. She'll be easily identifiable to anyone who knows her.

It's going to put people off using these forums- and some people have nowhere else to turn.

I actually feel physically sick. I hope the journalist is proud of themselves for making this woman's life so much worse at a horrendous time for her.

[WindPowerRanger]

Yes, YABU, in the sense that the DM has always taken the piss, in myriad ruthless ways.

Don't forget, this is the newspaper whose reporter in Ireland inveigled her way into the home of the woman whose family drowned when their car drove off a quay, in order to con her into giving them material they could publish.

If they can do that, they can certainly lift a whole internet thread and republish it.

And yet we keep being told what an old-fashioned moralist Paul Dacre is. Curious.

[namechangingagainagain]

I thought the same when I saw it.

Although mumsnet is a public forum there is an expectation of the audience you will have.

I was once given the advice not to post anything on here I wouldn't be happy to write on a sign outside my house...... however being subject to a mailonline story is a bit like taking out a 20ft high illuminated message board on oxford street.

my thoughts are stil with the OP from that story and I hope she is ok

[CalonGoch]

So many threads are ending up in the DM these days - they must have a designated 'MN reader' in the same way someone's assigned the arduous journalistic task of watching This Morning and reporting on Holly's skirts.

[DailyFailAreABunchOfCunts]

Hacker - I have. But posted here because I believe there is strength in numbers. I know a lot of people aren't comfortable with the fact that various journalists actively mine through MN for cheap article content, but most accept it as an inevitable consequence of posting online. This particular article from the DM feels outrageously invasive, so is there a risk that posters will stop using MN for the great support that it can provide - for fear that they are going to end up with their stories splashed across a cheap rag?

[NeedACleverNN]

It's the risk one takes when posting onto a public forum.

However they have took the piss and should have used some common sense.

[DailyFailAreABunchOfCunts]

I would like to know if MNHQ has any way of contacting the poster who started the thread, to make her aware of the fact that her very personal and identifiable story is now on a major news website, complete with screenshots of - easily searchable - posters names?

[VagueIdeas]

It's one thing to mine MN for funny stories, but to take a grieving mother's story and publish screenshots and her son's name is fucking low.

Yes it's a public forum, but where's the public interest in that? Invading a family's privacy for clickbait? Low.

[VertigoNun]

Disgrace.

[DailyFailAreABunchOfCunts]

In case anyone is wondering - I didn't change NN for this thread! It was as a result of being fed up with journos screenshotting threads, so I changed to something that they wouldn't quote.

[BirthdayBetty]

I hope the op of that thread doesn't see that article

[Wishfulmakeupping]

I think it fucking awful actually- I know it's the public domain and that's the risk we all take posting here but this feels too far.
I've noticed DM stalking here for material the lighthearted stuff but this is far too intrusive and private someone baring their pain like this looking for support then finding its been published as a story on DM- it's not right.

[FriskyFrog]

I remember that thread too. Very moving. It made me feel so lucky I haven't lost a child.

What kind of emotionally stunted individual would steal someone's grief like that, and make it public in a different medium without the OP's permission or knowledge, just to meet a minor work requirement?

What an utter parasite. Is there some sort of way we can register our revulsion as a group?

[RaeSkywalker]

Actually, what really, really takes the piss is that they've just lifted the thread. They haven't even bothered to add the names of organisations that support parents who have lost children, or included any information about the kind of support that might be available on the NHS for example. They haven't, for example, bothered to include the opinion and advice of a bereavement counsellor.

It's a totally ghoulish, utterly lazy article.

[Buzzardbird]

Do you actually read that piece of trash? I am interested as I am completely with you but wonder how you find out?