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.

Well mumsnet could state that they are annoyed about it, for example. They do not have to cosy up to the DM, though they may wish to for business reasons of course.

Are some posters saying they don't think it's morally wrong, or just that it is not illegal and should be expected?

It might well be legal but it is very far from moral.

If MN are happy to stand by and watch the credibility of the site undermined, then every topic needs to carry a clear warning that it may be quoted and lifted verbatim by the national press.

Well I can see this website becoming a barrel of laughs from now on!

Who the hell is going to post anything private?

While I despise the daily mail and everything it stands for, the reality is that this is a public website. If you post your private business on a public website it becomes public property to all intents and purposes. You lose any control over what happens to it.

And I said this on the other thread but will say it here as well. Posters on this site were more than happy to encourage the poster of that thread to share her child's name, pictures, all identifying information on here even though this is as much of a public site as the Daily mail, and yet now that the DM have lifted those details those same posters are up in arms about this poster's privacy being violated? Both the hypocrisy and naivety on here are astounding.

Usual - but it's different to having it here, and having it unwittingly posted on a goddamned news site! Can you not see the difference?

MN is not private though, it never has been. You don't even have to be a member to read it.

Exactly

Wannabe - the poster was among a group of parents posting about bereavement. She received support and kindness and of course she shared her beautiful little son's details.
She did not ring up the Bastarding Mail and say - here - here's a pic of my baby boy who I've lost, do a story about me!
Jesus.

Perhaps we need to look trough our own posts and ask mumsnet to delete anything we wouldn't like to see on the DM. They would be rather busy I suspect.

I'm sorry waterrat but I have no sympathy whatsoever for the 'journalist'. She's old enough to know the difference between right and wrong. She probably sees stories like this as the way to build her reputation and career. She has to deal with the consequences of that approach.

To equate it to real life, it's like a funeral AND THE DETAILS OF ALL CONVERSATIONS AMONG THE BEREAVED being transcribed and published. Just because they were in public doesn't mean they didn't have a reasonable expec-fucking-tation of privacy.

But felicity OP posted the information freely on a site that DM are known to use for their web site.

This isn't a copyright issue, but it is probably against the Editors Code of Practice

I don't know whether only the OP can make the complaint or whether everyone could on the basis that by publishing articles the Daily Mail makes MN a place where people are less likely to seek advice if there is a risk that they end up in the newspapers.

No she didn't but she posted all of that information on an open unsecured public forum that anyone can see.

Posters on this site were more than happy to encourage the poster of that thread to share her child's name, pictures, all identifying information on here even though this is as much of a public site as the Daily mail, and yet now that the DM have lifted those details those same posters are up in arms about this poster's privacy being violated? Both the hypocrisy and naivety on here are astounding.

This. I'm old enough on here to remember the Riven thread too. Posters were saying stuff like "there must be something we can do to bring it the attention of the papers? Let's tweet big named people!"
Then when the big named people sat up and took notice, posters were posting "make it stop!" "They have no right to print stuff!"
I had a face like this just thinking well, what the hell did they expect?!
It's NOT private on here.