You’ve quoted a lot of times... but yes your Brown remark doesn’t fit within the pandemic, so you can see SM usage was lower in his time.
Setting the scene ie hounding politicians on a much bigger scale and most of it was anti gov and to the benefit of Labour. They were happy to to benefit then, but now feel the same heat and don’t like it.
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 20:55
You've said quite a lot of things! But you'd need to explain how the increase in social media usage across the population meant a small segment of it were the ones setting a scene for something that obviously not only preceded them but was happening on a much wider scale than them.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 20:51
Partygate was when the media really started profiting from dissatisfaction on SM which is a powerful combination.
But still if it was Covid it’s only a year or two earlier not during Brown, May, Cameron or Blair. Which is what I said below.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 20:48
It does, but again this is something that was already very well established before the period you're referring to. For obvious reasons the data shows big social media usage accelerations during the lockdown periods, ie preceding the Partygate revelations.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 20:43
No the power of increased online SM chat is what I’m referring to. It impacts politics in a new way.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 20:39
It has increased in recent years, but that scene was very much set before Partygate. The online-ification of everything during covid accelerated a trend that had been established for some time.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 20:33
No because hounding on SM has increased in recent years, since partygate.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 20:25
No it couldn't, as you're talking about something that existed well before the period you're talking about and using channels that were in much wider use than one British opposition party. This is why you're wrong.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 20:19
Yes it could as I said Labour referred to Labourites.
And I only quoted one specifically, so I’m not sure you’ve looked well enough, perhaps scroll back again to check.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 20:15
None of the posts you quoted in your first one in this discussion could accurately describe something Labour set the scene for, as opposed to having been participants in a very wide ranging tapestry.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 20:11
Ok that’s not how mn works, if I quote a post it’s referring to that post.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 20:08
You said that Labour set the scene and the first post in this conversation here is about them calling for GEs and trying to get PMs to resign. It is a matter of fact that they did neither of these things, that both were happening well before the period you're focusing on. That means you were wrong. There's a reason none of the many goalpost moves and vague obfuscations have managed to construct a use of those words that could apply to what actually happened.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 20:04
No I used the language I wanted to which worked with the post I was replying to. It was you who got it wrong.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 20:02
Then use terminology that better matches the point you want to make than 'Labour set the scene'. Because after all, you were talking about something that has been attempted a lot previously, and using a medium that obviously wasn't confined to MN and BTL. If you pick your words better, you won't have to keep goalpost moving.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 19:48
Your last line is the cause of the misunderstanding, it’s too narrow. The post I responded to referred to general hounding a PM out.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 19:43
Well there's a lot of things you could be referring to here, the increase in social media having been so very broad ranging and obviously going a lot beyond some people on MN during Partygate. I've definitely noticed things like soundbite culture from twitter, bots of all persuasions and Musk's political stances being influential, but I don't think that's what you mean when you say Labour set the scene for GE calls when the PM changes?
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 19:00
Of course there is. Have you really not noticed the recent up tick in SM political backlash?
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 18:58
Yes you have. There is no context that can explain why a pattern of complaining that already existed and a trend towards social media usage that was long established before the last administration could possibly have had the scene set by a group of people on Mumsnet in 2021-22.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 18:55
No I haven’t. You just missed the post I responded to and context.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 18:47
No it doesn't, or you'd have been able to explain it by now instead of goalpost moving. And once again, if there being news happening is a reason not to post about this, you'd have stopped by now.
Words have meanings. You used these ones wrongly.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 18:42
Yes it does. I’m not writing a prime ministerial speech, you just got bogged down for no reason.
When there’s actual news happening.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 18:40
It doesn't fit with you claiming they set the scene, however.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 18:02
Again Labourites hounding online. Which fits with the post I replied to.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 17:57
No they didn't.
The scene of calling for a GE when the PM changes mid Parliament existed long before the most recent Labour you're talking about, as evidenced by calls for Brown to have one in 07. And the scene of using social media for political communication went well beyond any British opposition party. Labour didn't have the power to do that, and frankly their comms strategy hasn't been particularly revolutionary either.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 17:41
Labourites set the scene.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 17:37
Having looked, there's no post that explains how Labour set the scene when what you actually mean was people who may or may not have supported Labour did a thing that had already been done a lot before, on a medium that others including people viscerally opposed to them were also using. One can only conclude that no such explanation exists, what with it being an inherently ridiculous claim in the first place.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 17:33
Yes you missed it. It’s a really short chain of two posts but it will give you the context. You quoted mine.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 17:29
You and I are focusing equally on your scene setting claim. Or alternatively, you've done it more if you were discussing this with someone else that I've missed. If having a new PM today is a reason for me not to focus on your claim, it's also a reason for you not to focus on it now and indeed not to have made that error in the first place.
Edit- perhaps @CagneyLacey or @LuckyHazelFox might shed some light, given their approving responses to you? I'm very ready to see a specific justification for the 'set out' claim from anyone.
Edited
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 17:26
You do realise I responded to someone else before you launched in. Look for that post. And no I don’t mean they were hounding me.
There’s a new PM, speech, cabinet and you’re focusing on this and still not getting it right.
Hounding is the word they used that should stop wrt Labour. As Labourites enjoyed doing the same it’s hypocritical to now want it to stop.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 17:22
Afraid I still don't see who you mean, as the only posts I've seen attempt a definition are from you in response to me. If such a person were hounding you as opposed to simply replying, it should be easy for you to find their posts.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 17:14
Scroll back and see - hounding
Labourites did it and now don’t like it.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 17:13
Sorry which pp? I've not seen any post where someone attempts to explain how Labour set the scene other than all your attempts, would you mind quoting the bit you're thinking of? I'm referring specifically to scene setting, nothing else.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 17:10
I’d say the it is the hounding the pp referred to in their post. To which I responded (and could have been left rather than more scrutiny than the new PM’s speech).
Which some now would like to stop as it’s impacting their party. But many would have contributed to at the time.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 17:07
Embracing it doesn't mean they set the scene.
What is the 'it' you think Labour supporters online set up and what does set up mean in that context specifically? Using standard definitions of the term.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 17:05
At partygate it became more about the every day poster hounding, which the op wants to stop. That happened recently and Labourites embraced it, set it up as a way social media would be. Delighted at how much it could impact politics.
That is now aimed at their party.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 17:01
Yep, don't disagree with any of this. It's the bit about this specific group of online supporters setting the scene when this sort of whining was done well before them that was wrong.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 16:55
Labour online, ie supporters as in mn, btl and social media sites. Not the party.
They hounded of course and enjoyed the outcome. The pp said that hounding should now stop, it won’t and it’s hypocritical of those who joined in who say the same.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 16:48
Once again, don't include me in the 'you' of Labour supporters. I am a floating voter and you don't know who I've most recently chosen for what. You are not going to do the you only disagree with something stupid I've said because you're a Labour supporter routine here. @CagneyLacey just want to highlight this bit to you as well.
And either way, Labour didn't set the scene. The only way this could be true is if you included people who are literally MPs and activists for other movements in 'Labour' which is obviously batshit. They simply didn't have that level of influence.
Edited
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 16:34
Labour as in all of you supporting them. Geez it’s really not this hard. The poster I responded to was annoyed hounding went on and said it had to stop.
From partygate onwards Labour (including Labourites) leant in / created / used whatever you want to hound the last gov. You now don’t like it.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 16:27
But the first paragraph was agreed way back. We both know that's true. It's just that only one of us was daft enough to make any kind of suggestion that it was a thing Labour specifically had ushered in.
There isn't any definition of Labour that will make that true. Because people who obviously aren't Labour were both calling for GEs when PMs changed and using social media for political purposes well before Labour last administration. No British opposition has the kind of influence you attributed to them once you decided you were talking about social media.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 16:19
Your hyper focus hasn’t changed anything which is Labour are now upset the social media they used is now coming back at them.
By Labour I mean those that support them and believe in that party. There’s been a few stop using SM in this way posts. Which obviously won’t happen but is also incredibly hypocritical.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 16:15
I'm focusing on what you said, which is that Labour set the scene. Whether you mean people actually known to be Labour members, activists and MPs or people who said things you didn't like on MN, they were not setting the scene because they didn't have the power and nor were they doing anything new.
There's nothing wrong with slagging Labour people off for being hypocrites now whilst not trying to pretend there's anything new about it. You overshot.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 16:11
I think you’re focusing too much on the opposition calling for an election. I’m talking about the broader criticism via SM which benefited Labour. Supporters were happy to use it and now don’t like it back.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 16:09
You're according MN far too much importance, although in fairness you didn't actually say that in the first place and only tried to make it about MN once you'd begun the goalpost moving process. MN and BTL are two small parts of the wider internet landscape.
Labour did not set the scene for current opposition calls for a GE. There is no possible way to construct that phrase that also gives them the necessary level of influence on social media as well as accepts the fact that opposition parties were doing it under Brown. It cannot be done.
And lastly, you don't know what my politics are. I'm a floating voter, but you don't know which ways I've floated in which elections. Whereas you, on the other hand, are partisan. Which is why you were daft enough to make such a broad claim about Labour's influence in the first place.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 16:03
Context shouldn’t make it this difficult for you. I didn’t think it was that hard to get given I cited mn and btl media which are clearly not the Labour party.
And you’re missing the huge amounts of criticism aimed at the last gov including on here. You’re getting similar now and don’t like it. But thought it ok then. Reap what you sow etc
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 15:54
If one broadens out 'setting the scene' beyond any actual meaning of setting the scene then sure, yes. However, words have meanings and you don't get to move the goalposts.
It's evident that what you actually meant was Labour were doing the same thing in opposition as various Tories are now. That's true, but it doesn't mean they set the scene. Opposition calling for GEs and social media mushrooming both existed long before Labour last administration. As well as the issue you have with definition, you also ignore the massive, Musk shaped influence on the social media landscape.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 15:47
Yes it can and does. You just focussed on Labour comms and argued that for some time. Broaden it out to the areas I mentioned and it’s easy see Labour supporters were happy to use social media to its full extent. But now don’t like it back at them.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 15:38
The things you describe don't and can't mean them setting the scene, so obviously they wouldn't be read that way.
There's a distinction between an organisation/group of people having done a particular thing at some point and this behaviour having been sufficiently new and influential to constitute them scene setting. Especially in a social media landscape so influenced by someone like Musk who clearly isn't a Labour supporter.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 14:43
Including supporters online, it was easy to get surely as I mentioned mn and btl in the press as examples.
Neither of those are actually the party or their comms so it was easy to get context.
If you read it that way you’ll probably agree they set the scene which is great.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 14:39
You're missing what you wrote.
I agree that Labour used the change in social media to their advantage. Which does not mean they set the scene in doing so. That's yet another way of saying something different to your actual claim about setting the scene in order to try and detract from the fact that it was wrong.
And just think, you could've said all the things that are true without pretending that Labour are the ones who established this.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 14:36
You’re missing the change in social media in recent years. It’s become much more powerful in its impact on politics.
It was something Labour used to their advantage and there were no limits on that. The call for limits now are hypocritical and won’t work. So yes you set the scene, or you reap what you sow if the first can’t be taken in.
You’re also limiting your posts to Labour comms only when it’s of course much broader than that and includes supporters online. Who now apparently don’t like the same back at them.
Edited
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 14:33
You haven't proved anything.
There is no definition of set the scene that could be applied either to Labour continuing an already established (stupid) custom when they were last in opposition or to their use of social media for political communications. You overshot, and looked desperate in doing so.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 14:23
You haven’t rebutted anything. It’s pointless to continue.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 14:19
That doesn't make what you said about scene setting right, or the other points relevant to whether Labour and supporters were setting the scene. It's not that hard to discern that you were wrong when you claimed that, and that you keep trying to move the goalposts.
It remains a fact that calling for a GE when a PM is installed without one was well established before Labour's last period in opposition, and that they lacked the power or influence to set the scene in the sense of the move towards greater social media. They could not therefore have set the scene.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 14:13
Oh my. Labour including supporters, given I’m talking about SM use it’s not that hard to discern.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 14:12
It is wrong. Once again you're moving the goalposts. The two things you've written here aren't wrong, but they're also completely different points from whether Labour 'set the scene' for this.
It makes the doubling down all the more ill advised, because you could've made the point about hypocrisy without tying it to an obviously foolish claim about scene setting that you can't possibly back up.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 13:52
It’s not wrong. No one from Labour posted maybe this criticism is a bit strong for last gov, they were happy to go strong on it. They object now because it’s against their party.
They (and you) will just have to put up with it. It was something they were happy to benefit from.
Edited
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 13:38
It really is.
Labour did not set the scene for what is happening now, whether you mean criticism of changing PM without a GE, increased use of social media or any other strangulated definition you might come up with because you didn't phrase yourself very well.
Labour are indeed feeling the brunt of social media, which is a different point and does not affect the fact that your claim was wrong.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 12:06
It’s really not you just don’t want to hear it. Oh well Labour are feeling the brunt of SM now instead. Enjoy.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 11:54
Why did you use the word 'all' then? Do you think all Labour supporters did it, and if so how does that mean they had the power to set the scene? Or do you think all the people doing it were Labour? Because what you've written here is not like the rather mangled comment in the preceding post.
It's a lot of hole digging to back up a rather silly claim. Particularly when you could've just made the entirely reasonable point that it's annoying to see people who called for GEs when their party were in opposition suddenly change tune now.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 11:47
You what now? Labour supporters did to the last gov on social media what they’d like to stop now. Obviously that’s not going to happen.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 11:44
Sorry just to be clear, are you claiming the people using social media during the 2019-24 Tory administration were Labour supporters, and nobody of any other political persuasion engaged?
I've told you before about not going waaah you just think that because you support Labour when someone whose politics you don't actually know makes a point you don't like, but I want to be clear exactly what flavour of that is happening here.
Edited
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 11:40
There is it’s all the Labour supporters who used SM. You can see it on here. Now you and others say hang on this is tough, well yeh that’s what you enjoyed at the time.
Edited
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 11:37
They didn't. There is no definition of 'set the scene' that will back up your claim. The tendency to call for GEs already existed and was not set by Labour, and the escalation of social media importance wasn't either. These things are facts.
It is true that Labour didn't say hang on, and it's also both a different point and a goalpost move. They didn't call for change and instead continued practicing an already established tradition, they couldn't possibly have done anything about the social media spiralling because they didn't have the power. For balance, this all applies to the opposition who are doing it now.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 11:30
Labour overall including supporters set the scene. Mn is an example, but obviously across the board, btl on press too. No one from Labour said hang on maybe we should hold back on this, they will say it now as they’re under the spotlight.
Edited
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 11:27
A Labour party in opposition certainly didn't have the power to drive that level of change. It's a trend that had been happening for a number of years, was escalated probably during covid when more moved online, and goes well beyond anything one political party could do. That includes even the one in government at the time. Not surprisingly, already established patterns of oppositions calling for GEs using whatever channels get them most attention are expressed through the channels that get them most attention.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 11:16
Yes but by scene I mean the power of social media and its impact on politics. That is more recent than Brown or May, or Cameron.
It’s really picked up in the last few years, since partygate.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 11:12
They do indeed. On that we're agreed, and if the Tories ever get back in they'll do it too. It's part of the playbook now. I don't think that's a good thing, but like the other downsides of social media we appear to be lumbered with it until a critical enough mass of people ignore it. However, it remains a fact that this scene was already well established before Labour's last period of opposition.
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 11:06
The same people who are saying stop SM used it as much as possible against the last lot. That’s now happening to them and it’s not wanted.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 11:03
No they didn't, because the Tories were doing it before them. The scene existed already because the norm had already been established.
The social media environment is obviously much vaster now, but no one political party made that happen, and they're now all stuck with the effects of something multiple different Oppositions ushered in.
eta- also now I think of it there were def Lib Dems in 07 too. I expect they didn't get the coverage the largest opposition party did, understandably.
Edited
Quoting BrownBookshelf
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 11:00
Yeh they did. The media and SM really became a destabilising force during partygate. SM is far bigger factor than Brown days. They’re now realising what it means as they’re in power.
They don’t like it but were happy to benefit from it, SM criticism won’t go away even though I’m sure they’d like to have more power over it.
Quoting EasternStandard
BrownBookshelf ·
20/07/2026 10:55
They very much didn't set the scene, there were people on the right agitating for a GE in 07 when Brown took over, nothing to do with their numbers being more favourable with Cameron than Howard obv. There was just less social media to do it on then.
But I agree with the rest, it's part of the landscape now and inevitable. Personally I tune it out.
Quoting FinchiePink
EasternStandard ·
20/07/2026 10:49
Labour set the scene on this and benefited from the media and outrage on SM to get in. They’ll get the same back whether people now think it’s too much or not.
Quoting RodneyKitten
FinchiePink ·
20/07/2026 10:45
Doesn't matter. It needs to stop. This is the government of the UK, not a playground popularity context.
Quoting FinchiePink
RodneyKitten ·
20/07/2026 10:11
It’s only a taste of their own medicine.
FinchiePink ·
20/07/2026 09:04
Absolutely not, we don't need more expense and more disruption.
What we need is for the media and certain agitators in the political spectrum / public to stop actively hounding out prime ministers and calling for general elections ad nauseum.
I can't say I'm thrilled about his politics but what we need now is stability. No more revolving doors. Prime ministers should serve their term and be allowed to do so.