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.

DailyFail I'd be a better DM journalist than the one who write this article. Thrilled that she cared enough to take our critiques on board.

MNHQ can you let us know if the OP on the thread has been warned/ contacted to check if she is ok?

It seems insane that a tiny tweet needs permission and yet a thread with lots of posts writing at length does not. The idea of using only a proportion is crazy when you apply it to tweets. And why on threads is it the whole thread, not the post, of which a proportion can be used?

is there anyone we can complain to? Like ofcom (I think that's tv only, is there a newspaper version?)? It's clearly unethical so whilst it's not illegal we could all complain on the basis of it being hugely unethical. If all of us were to complain we could at least make the daily mails life a bit difficult.

The only other thing that strikes me is whether we should have a private members only forum for sensitive topics. Make everyone who joins agree to not sharing any info outside the forum? It's really sad that the daily mail has sunk this low

MNHQ can you let us know if the OP on the thread has been warned/ contacted to check if she is ok?

stuff like this on mn is part of the problem- goady posters always asking for more information- this is real life peoples information that you are asking for and the more info someone puts out, the easier it becomes to identify them. An OP contains the information they want to give, leave it at that.

why do WE need to know if mnhq have talked to that person?

Quite right araiba. Why on earth should MNHQ let you know RaeSkywalker? Why are you more entitled to the information than, say, a DM reader?

I read this post here and was disgusted to read it on the daily mail app last night..

Blantent lift from this site. It would be different if they had approach the lady and asked / interviewed with her consent.. But I don't think from reading it was just a summary of the post and other posted comments.

Lazy thoughless journalism

araiba and River

I'm not asking for anything other than "we have made contact with the OP of the original thread to ensure that they are aware of the situation".

That is totally different to wanting loads of information on the OP. I would like to know if MN have made an effort to make contact with a vulnerable poster. That is all.

And it is not unreasonable.

I remember Riven and the DM columns.
Posters were falling over themselves to save the day by alerting papers and whoever.
And it's so ridiculous the amount of DM links with faux outrage posted here that people 'stumble across' but they don't actually read the bloody thing.
I don't read the DM but honestly l see more of it in here than in real life.

The journalist should have attempted to contact the OP and asked if they wanted to talk.

Reporting somebody's personal story without directly getting a response from them would be a very clear breach of guidelines in more reputable organisations such as the Guardian and the BBC. Even if a senior public figure is referenced there will be an attempt to contact them. With an ordinary person it is not acceptable to report on their personal story in this way without their permission.

BUT - big but. People need to get real about the internet. This is not a pub conversation. If you really don't want anyone discussing or further examining your story, or sharing it wherever they like - then don't use the internet to talk about it.

IT's sad, but people have unrealistic expectations of forums like musmsnet as being some kind of cosy private space.

Are our posts in the public domain? Or do they belong to Mumsnet? Tbh I would have assumed it was the latter - or is there some rule in copyright about not being able to own individuals posts? Actually that sort of seems quite unlikely thinking about it.

From the T&Cs:

"By submitting User Content to us, simultaneously with such posting you automatically grant to us a worldwide, fully-paid, royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, fully sublicensable, and transferable right and license to use, record, sell, lease, reproduce, distribute, create derivative works based upon (including, without limitation, translations), publicly display, publicly perform, transmit, publish and otherwise exploit the User Content (in whole or in part) as Mumsnet, in its sole discretion, deems appropriate. We may exercise this grant in any format, media or technology now known or later developed for the full term of any copyright that may exist in such User Content."

Fair use is an odd one though because it's a US-only law. Law gets so confusing and distorted on the internet, even when it's designed for the internet!

What Rae said. I'm not asking for a verbatim transcript of a discussion between MNHQ and another poster. Just confirmation that MNHQ has at least contacted this person (i.e. that they have taken the time to do so), rather than a bereaved parent suddenly wondering why her thread has been deleted and not knowing that the DM has decided to cover it.

Ah okay, CandP, I'm with you now. But that's the UK law, Fair Dealing. Fair Use is US and a lot less restrictive.

but why do you need to know?

Yes, okay CandP. I understand.

I'd like to know because I am concerned that a vulnerable person, who posted for support following the death of her child, might not be aware that a major tabloid has 'written' an article about her and her grief. I'd also like to know because it would provide a bit of reassurance to me - and other posters who have asked - that MNHQ will make an effort to notify people in these sorts of circumstances. A simple yes or no is all that is required; it's something that MNHQ has provided in the past so it is not atypical for them to do this.

araiba I'd like to know because, whilst a lot of this is out of MNHQ control, they can and should notify the OP. It would be reassuring to know that this has happened.

... And my request wasn't "goady" arabia

It's the Penis Beaker effect. Except it's getting a lot more invasive

I honestly think it's none of your, or our, business DailyFail Rae.

I don't mean to be rude but it really isn't.