To be pissed off at the media/Mumsnet situation

[ASAS]

Long time lurker, cancel the cheque, you're the carcass etc. Joined mumsnet on the worst day of my life, you vipers saved me hence hold a soft spot in my heart (go on, admit you love it here too).

I was at a CIPR training event today and
although we MNers already know this is a prevalent issue, part of the training recommended trawling the forums for content. Mumsnet was the only source mentioned in this way.

Do I need grip or am I right to be slightly pissed off by this? On any given day we have the usual hilarity balanced with someone needing help as Women's Aid is engaged etc, so this place is part cultural phenomenon and part first stop when shit gets real. I just feel quite annoyed that journalists are now being trained to trawl here, and to be clear it was the carpark/hen weekend type drama that was encouraged to be used to create content rather than investigative journalism or, you know, anything we might actually find useful as a section of the population.

AIBU or no?

Anyone?

What's CIPR?

Chartered Institute of Public Relations

Sorry, Chartered Institute of Public Relations

Did you not say that was disgusting?

Sounds like bloody awful training tbh. Why is a professional body recommending such crap practices and content?

I'm not surprised MN is a source, but the CIPR should absolutely not be recommending this practice.

It's lazy journalism but I understand why prs would look through forums. Trade press prs look at relevant trade forums.

It's tricky op because I do totally agree with you but, at the same time, the world has changed and communication has changed.

You can't really hunt for a story in the same way as you have ... 10+ years ago. If it's used as a starting point and then researched properly, newsworthy, brings something more than "cheap" entertainment to the table then fair enough.

Sadly, the majority seems to be seeking the "shock" shareable content factor that most news sources and outlets thrive on nowadays. Sidebar of shame, Buzzfeed style anecdotes without any proof other than sexygal375's thread on Reddit etc

I challenged the integrity, the response was some shite to do with advertising and Holly Willob's floral dresses. It just unsettled me as I read many harrowing things here and try to help if I can, but as mentioned up thread it is a public forum.

And to prove it (and i doubt this is the same sort of thing really but is relevant) I write for a very well known website and do a lot of research on Instagram. It's based on a visual look a lot of the time, which I then cross check with forums and other websites with reviews etc.

All's fair in love and war would be my take. I don't think journalism or journalists are renowned for taking the moral stand. You're on a loser here. It's gone too far down the drain,.

Probably also shows my age as I'd never, NEVER generate content this way (although I'm in-house rather than journo so less time pressure, not measured on Ad Equivalent etc).

I have to say @ASAS at first I was very but for my subject (and the fact I can't traipse all over the country at the drop of a hat) it actually works very well.

Plus my personal knowledge of my subject has become a lot better as a result.

I work very niche though.

Everytime I see it i have less respect for the publisher. Goodbye newspaper subscriptions.

I don't really see what the problem is. I joined for the pregnancy/baby chat but I stayed for the nonsense and drama. I don't read tabloids but I do enjoy the sillier threads that tend to be the ones that get picked up by the Mail or Buzzfeed or whatever. Plenty of people that don't read Mumsnet will enjoy them too so why not pinch em or link to em or whatever they do?

Why are people annoyed at journalists on this thread? This was an event for PR people, not journalists.

Good for you for challenging OP

I think the advice should have come a disclaimer that many of the threads are fiction, and thus shouldn't be reported as fact.

Unless they were suggesting you should create content via a forum like Mumsnet yabu.

This is (as everyone always says) a public website and although very useful and supportive it is not therapy or private, individualised support. That has always been accessed away from the public (e.g. Appointment at CAB or GP/phone call to Women's Aid) and that hasn't changed.

That said, it's the most gutter scraping work trawling websites for content. It must be very hard to feel any kind of professional credibility or personal integrity. Let's hope it's well paid to compensate eh? Sort of a Faustian Pact

Why are people annoyed at journalists on this thread? This was an event for PR people, not journalists.

What do you think PR people promote? Some of them promote stories written by journalists as was intimated by the op.

It is annoying, but it does mean this avenue can be harnessed.

I know from "cancel the check" but what is "you're the carcass"??

I've been here... about eight months, give or take, and I know a lot of the little things, but that's a new one on me!

(mexican house thief, sharon and the wasp, t-rexing in the Asda)

Years back, magazines like take a break used to pay £200 (?) If you wrote in and they used your story. Now they just lift stuff straight off social media. And of course pr people are all over social media now- its literally their job

Most of the 'journalists' where I live get their stories direct from Facebook, so sadly it's commonplace. Most papers have barely got enough staff for a five aside football team now so they do whatever they have to to provide quick cheap content