AIBU to suspect that there are a lot of Daily Mail journalists starting threads on here?

[zeezeek]

Have noticed a lot of goady threads starting lately - just the sort of thing to get the beloved DM readers hot under the collar. Plus, was flicking through the DM's You mag earlier (it was the only thing to read in the coffee shop!) and saw a couple of articles that referenced MN.

I know I'm paranoid, but just seems a bit strange.

YANBU
A few threads have read exactly like letters to the DM, they can't actually be real!

I think there are a lot of bored people/GFs posting OPs in AIBU today.

I can confirm there are journo's lurking. I was contacted by one looking to do a story on something I posted. So it would not surprise if threads are started by them or threads inspire them.

I can't believe people are bothering to post on them.

I did spot a very obvious journalist about a week ago asking about men's fashion and women buying men's clothes for them.

They used very journalisty words like 'up with the trend' which people don't really say.

If they are then it's embarrassingly lazy.

I'd assumed it was researchers from the Matthew Wright's show...

I think it's probably a mix of journos and 'normal' MN members.

The Daily Mail is a very widely read paper amongst Mumsnetters, so I suppose it stands to reason we'll get Daily Mail-esq threads.

Mind you, they seem to be coming along like buses at the moment, in 3's and 4's.

This is called astroturfing.

There is also a degree of political and corporate shilling here.

Basically people are paid to spread certain opinions to try and change public perception.

I hate to say it but journalists and researchers ask in a much cleverer way than some of the OPs on here.

I think there are a lot of papers using information from threads rather than doing their own work. I read a parenting section in a newspaper last week and some of the article read like parts out of different posts from parenting sites. Midterm/Halloween break will be coming up too so it will probably be worse during the school break

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shill

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astroturfing

It is more common that you think

Is it really called 'astroturfing'? Why?

Or is that a joke?

(Spell check doesn't like it.)

Yes paramedic. There is a poster on 'in the news' spouting loads of rhetoric and lots of daily fail and tory graph links, posting in a very shouty manner lots of bold and underlining. Also constantly calling other posters socialists etc, yawn. They must think we're stupid not to know their agenda. Very tedious.

Have never heard of astroturfing. It is slightly disturbing.

Guess the journo's who are relying on us lot on here for their stories then a) they must be bloody desperate and b) also bloody lazy.

Have never heard of astroturfing. It is slightly disturbing.

Guess the journo's who are relying on us lot on here for their stories then a) they must be bloody desperate and b) also bloody lazy.

Astroturfing. Every days a school day.

Socialist here and proud of it.

Along with atheist and republican and married to an immigrant.

Must be the DM's worse nightmare

MissMarpleCat, indeed.

They're trying to polarize people to a way of thinking.

People are social, if they're surrounded by people who say certain things, they begin to agree with them and do not feel about thinking in a certain way.

But if those people are paid or fake people, paid by organisations that want you think a certain way about subjects such as immigrants, housing or politics, it can be profitable to the people paying them.

For example, if there is a day where suddenly everyone is talking about a 'socialists', brand of coffee or nappy, then something could be fishy.

Follow the money

I wouldn't say it was dm journalists specifically - they seem to quite brazenly lift stories from reddit. Matthew Wright definitely and I've noticed more than once exact topics I've read here been used as fodder on heart radio breakfast show...

I reckon there's more than a few independents trying to gather material/inspriation but it'd be daft not to use forums as a resource I suppose.

I've seen a few recently. Tis very dull.

They're not real journalists, they are robots who rehash the same articles, using a combination of showcasing/flashing/flaunting/parading etc their pert/slim/curvy pins/assets/charms/bikini body.

But extra points today for the use of embonpoint - they must have refreshed their thesaurus programme!

And yeah, I know I shouldn't read it but every now and then I just can't help myself, like picking at a scab.

para I didn't know 'astroturfing' was the name for it.

I've been ignoring a lot lately. Although it's a pity the politics topic has been taken over by a handful of posters who just bombard everyone else with endless paragraphs.

Astroturfing usually refers to fake grass roots movements - so imagine a breast cancer patients' group, for example, that demands an expensive new cancer drug is made available on the NHS, and then turns out to have been set up and funded by a major pharmaceutical company.

So starting threads in MN isn't quite the same thing.

I don't think that the person in "In the News" who uses lots of bold and underline is a journalist. Journalists are usually a bit more succinct than that.

Astroturfing is the practice of masking the sponsors of a message or organization

...it often involves fake grassroots. Someone posting on MN trying to mobilise opinions that benefit their employer could in fact be considered trying to create a grassroot movement.

It is when a for-profit/commercial organisation is trying to shape public opinion for their own ends.

Like, take Richard Dyson of the Telegraph pushing for the cause of BTLers for example. Which is interesting reading and quite alarming.