Media Requests

hazey I see you're still in denial about Mr. Binks Chinese fake eBay unicorn.

My issue is that by deleting the thread the journalist in question and her fawning friends are free to claim MN'ers were appalling to her, with no way to show that she was in fact the instigator of most of the bad behaviour.

I do wonder if there are any shared advertisers on the DM website and MN, hence the speed at which MN deleted it...

as it was really unpleasant from all sides and we don't think anyone came out of it in a good light by the end

I posted an, admittedly sarcastic, post about a gluten intolerant unicorn, if you can't do that on mumsnet in response to a poorly worded, 'hey girls' type request from a Daily Mail journalist, then where can you do it?!

MN is however not a 'safe private/public space'

It is an open public space. Not a 'safe' space of any type. MNHQ have made their view on this crystal clear over and over again.

But if course that means that journos who post should, like all the rest of us, take the tough with the smooth.

Chipped I reported the post cotton made on Saturday to get MNHQ to respond.

They said they'd look at it but nothing yet.

Yep cotton made all the relevant points, over and over and explained clearly the issue and radio silence.

I am baffled as to the lack of response.

Nice to see no one has bothered to respond to Cotton ...

We will not be reinstating the thread as it was really unpleasant from all sides and we don't think anyone came out of it in a good light by the end.

I read and posted on that thread until shortly before its deletion, and I don't recognise that version of events. There were a few individual posts by Mn members that merited deletion for breaking talk guidelines, but that in no way characterised the thread as a whole - which was robust, sarcastic and challenging, as was entirely merited by the 'media request' of the OP - and you seem to be equating legitimate responses to a witlessly reactionary media request with the discourse of that kind of misogynistic tabloid carried onto your forum by a unprepared, unprofessional, rude (and possibly deliberately goady) hack, who is now publicly trashing your forum.

While we can totally see your point, we also think that the OP was misguided by posting in the first place.

This sentence doesn't make any sense to me. 'Our point', insofar as there was any consensus, was precisely that the journalist was 'misguided', although that's a rather generous interpretation of her request and subsequent attitude, on and off Mn. I'm not sure what concession you think you are making here.

I'm honestly puzzled as to why Mn, which I have generally seen as a force for good in that it offers actual women - including the vulnerable and isolated who are here in large numbers - a safe private/public place to express real views and ask for and offer advice, in fact, as often political in a very real sense. In offering that opportunity, it is pretty much the opposite of the kinds of publication the 'media requester' writes for, which traffic in body fascism, prurience and vacuous stereotypes.

It is a sad day when MNHQ seems to be prepared to let that kind of discourse take priority over the views of its own members. I can't see what grounds that journalist would have had for any legal case, so I am honestly puzzled as to why MNHQ's response has been so ill-considered, belated and toothless.

The journalist in question is completely unimportant in herself, of course - and I'm sure will return to peddling her stories about push presents, other women's fatness, and aggressive Chihuahuas - but she is significant as a symbol of every outlet that promulgates an appallingly reactionary and damaging view of women.

And if you can't see that, MNHQ, there's something gone very wrong at MN Towers.

i think its a shame, i didnt see all of the thread just the start. As it has been removed there is no rebuttal of the twitter comments from the 'journalist' and everyone now thinks that mumsnet are a 'nest of vipers'

let the truth back out - reinstate as a locked thread

Exactly tribot. Now the Daily Fail can accuse us of being vipers. Iona and Rebecca are saying we were the unpleasant ones, and our only defence was to suggest that people read it for themselves. So Sadie can write whatever she wants and all her chums can say poor little Sadie has been trolled.
Whilst my defence has been zapped. Thanks HQ (that's sarcasm as obviously HQ can't detect it)

Yes, I would like some assurance that the abuse of the PM system has been dealt with.

I would strongly disagree that it was unpleasant from all sides. You are allowing the public record of the event to be dictated by people working for one of the worst newspapers in the country, a newspaper with a very clear anti-feminist agenda and no concept of the truth.

I would suggest much closer moderation of Media Request threads in future. Concerns on all sides were not dealt with at the time. This is bound to happen again unless you change the rules of posting for the Media Requests board.

Daily Fail 1 Mumsnetters 0

Yup.

So basically MN are willing to appease journalists regardless of how they behave.

Lurcio - I totally agree but Iona's post makes it look like it was my comment that got the thread pulled, my post could have been deleted. HQ did not confirm - which they have done on other occasions - that sock-puppeting was going on, and that was why the original complaint was made.

Daily Fail 1 Mumsnetters 0

And Sadie's nasty pm's ?

Thanks for getting back to us.

I stand by my judgement of that thread -that with one or two exceptions (which could have been dealt with by deletions in the normal way) most mumsnetters were simply expressing robust disagreement, albeit with a bit of piss-taking thrown in. The person being consistently nasty was Sadie.

However, your sandbox, your rules... (can I add hun or would that get me a lifetime ban? )

No update so far.

I've had a similar message that they are investigating.

I have, no reply yet. I think they should though, deleted thread makes it look like that "journalist" is telling the truth about what happened

They replied to my report saying they will discuss it up the chain whether to reinstate or not. Maybe others who feel strongly about the dilution of the mumsnet ethos could report too?

MN HQ are deafeningly silent...

Her Twitter feed is hilarious and the fact that Samantha brick and the other dm hack are "supporting her through her dreadful ordeal" speaks volumes.

Just looked at the OPs twitter feed. She must be very proud if her journalism.

Chipped

Elfing?