to say mn is potentially putting people at risk

[LilQueenie]

twice I have gone to post something but stopped myself out of pure fear it will end up viral in the papers or magazines. It used to be a place to find support and advice. Now it feels like russian roulette. Not helpful at all.

Those journalists are parasites. Ignore.

Every time you post add in that the daily mail/fail are a bunch of cunts, surely they won't link to a message like that.

Really though don't put anything too personal on here and regularly name change. That is just common sense.

okay. here it is again. when you register you agree that anything you post on the mumsnet platform is theirs. that's standard.

also, don't spill your life on the internet and then complain when people read it.

and, this is not your safe space. neither is it a conspiracy to tease out all your darkest secrets and flog them to the highest bidder. it is the internet.

Those journalists are parasites. Ignore.

Bit much when they are just people in a dying industry, doing what their bosses tell them, in order to make a living writing.

It's the culture of the industry that is parasitic. And that comes from way higher up than the recent grad churning out clickbait.

It's a shame. DM did lift a DV related story a couple of weeks ago, so nothing is safe. Not MNHQ's fault though.

Salty. It's always a CHOICE to trade your morals in for money.

It's lazy, if it's the best they can do, they're NOT earning a living 'writing' and should make a less morally reprehensible choice.

twice I have gone to post something but stopped myself out of pure fear it will end up viral in the papers or magazines.

Don't be daft OP

The DailyFail are more likely to feature novelty stories like Kevin the Custody-Bear than some of the threads on Relationships where abuse and DV are discussed.

And how does putting something on page 16 of the Fail cause a problem anyway? Most of them become "filler stories" they don't end up as front page news that's reserved for Boris caught snogging Teresa in the champagne aisle in Waitrose

Yeah salty I suppose you could say the same about phone hacking couldn't you? -

I think it's sort of the other way round, it never was a truly safe space, this could always have happened and probably always has to some extent but for the most part it stayed low profile and posters were lured into a false sense of security. Now we are all much more aware of how it can go viral and post with more regard to privacy.

It isn't just a problem for Munsnet though. I use a Closed Local Fb Group - very general interest, just local news, and twice (fool me once....), something I posted ended up in our local rag, quoting my actual real life name. I was pretty angry and contacted the editor of the paper and the respinse was basically "tough tits". However, I tgink it has made me a lot more aware if what I out online, especially about my children.

Why shouldn't a journalist take something from MN and publish it? It may be the most boring paper in the world but if people choose to read it then I don't see the problem.
I do see a problem with people assuming a social media platform is private or in some way protected.

This again?
MN is a business and actively advertises its content (e.g. on twitter etc)
It's a public website that you don't even have to join and it's fair more likely that people will find potential outing stuff on here rather than happen to come across it in the DM.

MN is not putting anyone at risk and the use of hyperbole stops anyone taking you seriously.

People need to get a grip and realise it's not a 'safe space', it's an open forum which is here to make money

Annie
it's a bit strong to lable someone mortally reprehensible due to career. Do you extended this to other industries: defence, legal professionals, armed forces? What they are doing is not wrong, placing too much information about yourself on line is dangerous and always has been.

Guffaws at the suggestion to have a password protected area to stop DailyFail reporters from reading MN posts.

AKA cross between a chocolate teapot and nailing jelly to the wall.

And the number of threads about this aren't actually helping matters - more
Publicity for the DM!

Perhaps we should ask for a topic devoted to those who are so incensed about it...

It's not just UK papers that are trawling. I saw an MN lifted article in a Western Canadian online paper: globalnews.ca/news/3081483/uk-parents-expected-to-replace-louis-vuitton-purse-after-their-child-vomited-on-it/ There should be no expectation of online privacy no matter where you are.

The only thing I can think that MN could do would be to introduce the option to add a signature to all your posts - those reluctant to be in the DM could have their signature read 'Daily Mail are cunts' or similar (glitter optional??) and they probably wouldn't be lifted as a screenshot though could of course be quoted, or the post could be lifted with the signature blurred out. So if you were really dedicated, you would have to post your story in segments so the obscene slogan was intermittent throughout. It's just one of those things; I can see why people get angry about it but it's not really preventable. Anything you post online can end up anywhere in the world on any kind of public platform.

The print media is struggling. People read news online. So whereas your tabloid had a limited number of printed pages to fill with stuff, their online versions (free) are funded by advertising revenue and rely on reeling in the clicks. Employ non NUJ members to trawl the internet for clickbait and regurgitate it. Works for Reddit. Stack 'em high and sell 'em cheap.
This is the world now.

This. They are lazy though and usually just scan AIBU, chat and occasionally relationships. There are some good support threads buried in here that I can't see the click bait scanning journos ever touching. Also I don't recall seeing serious things reproduced in 99% of cases. I don't read the Daily fail, the mirror or the scum so my knowledge is based on what people bitch about. Usually it's weird stuff (my current front runner is the bear custody one) or sexual stuff.

The only one that fucked me off that I recall was the user who had serious medical issues and mn telling her to call an ambulance likely saved her life. The thread went into classics as a heartwarming story as well as a warning. It had to be pulled because the detail was very identifiable and the cunts at the mirror printed so much the OP felt one click and her entire family would know things she wasn't comfortable about.

For the hard of understanding:

1. MN is a business ergo it exists to make money

1. MN is also a PUBLIC forum which can be accessed by any of the 'public'

1. It is not a 'safe space'

1. MN makes money from advertising

1. It promotes itself and sometimes threads are picked up by journos

1. This potentially increases traffic to MN which means more money

1. A person worried about being spotted in the paper has more chance of being recognised on here

Not sure why it is so difficult for people to get their heads round?

Although it's true that nothing put online is truly private, and people should know this, I think there's a double-standard going on.

If someone vulnerable posts about a personal crisis here, saying they have no real life support and they need to talk, MN users will generally respond as if they have a duty of care. Not in the sense they're individually responsible for helping this person, but any replies that are dismissive, contemptuous, cruel or focus on some minor point (poor grammar, lack of paragraphs) will be loudly criticised and, depending on exact content, reported or deleted.

But it's not illegal to respond to a desperate post about DV or gaslighting by saying it's 'I should HAVE left him, not I should OF left him, come on' or you seem like hard work. It's just extremely unsupportive and wankerish. The fact that it's considered unacceptable on MN suggests that this is a community and not a random free-for-all bulletin board or gladiatorial arena where the only restrictions are libel laws.

Yes, the DM can legally skim off whatever they want, regardless of personal hurt caused -- not just to the OP, but to all MN users: the upsurge in deliberately provocative or divisive posts designed to get in the paper; the constant speculation about who is a journalist; the people who simply don't post because they can't afford to have a sensitive situation broadcast.

Just because the DM has so far stuck to threads about social etiquette or sex, doesn't mean they can't migrate to Relationships or Adoption or Infertility or Special Needs next. And what will be the response to that? 'Tough shit: you shouldn't have been talking about personal issues on the internet'?

Whole sections of MN presuppose people sharing difficult, sensitive, often hurtful personal experiences. To talk about posts being or not being 'in the spirit of Mumsnet', and moderate or criticise comments for being unsupportive, and give the impression of community (and I'm talking about MN users as well as MN admin) -- and then respond to DM story-grabs with a snide 'well, where's your membership fee?' or 'did you think you were amongst friends?' or 'so just don't post any more, then' is a total attitude-switch.

I know there isn't one single easy answer for the issue, but it's depressing to see that the kneejerk reaction to this issue is to pour scorn on anyone complaining about it. Yes, it's naive to assume privacy. But these aren't isolated incidents; the DM really seems to be here more and more, and how we react now risks setting a precedent. I would hate to see the more sensitive topic boards left completely silent and unusable.

Funnily enough, until recently, MNers who were quoted in the press wore it as a badge of honour.

Then people started posting scurrilous sex stories (OMFG!!! the window cleaner caught my bottom as I was on top of my child's teacher hahahahaha!!!) for the l-o-l-s and whinge when they get lifted.

I'd imagine the press know just as well as the rest of us that 99% of what they lift from MN is made up bollocks.

At risk? That's the sort of hyperbole that means people don't take posters seriously. There was a ludicrous post yesterday where someone claimed it was a safeguarding issue if a teen stayed up late.

But what can you actually do? You can whine all you like but it won't make a difference. You can't stop it as both the newspaper and MN are benefitting. And every time this happens, more people join so if people decide to leave as a result, Justine et al won't be crying into their gin!

I don't think MN is putting people at risk.

The internet is not a special safe place, anything we post here can in theory be accessed by anyone in the entire world who has internet access and can read English. It is the least private thing imaginable.

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3559474/Grieving-mother-reveals-buys-dead-son-clothes-signs-school-clubs-cope-loss.html

I remember this post. Now it's on the daily mail. I'm sure the OP would not of wanted this. She needed help and support. But the post ended up in the daily mail. I think the daily mail and Facebook being allowed to publish posts will put so many people off seaking support on this sight which is a shame.