To say “I don’t give permission for this to be published in the daily mail” on a post is meaningless?

[AlternativePerspective]

I see this on threads and posts all the time. People saying that they don’t want this appearing in the tabloids so they don’t give permission.

Thing is, as much as I despise the Daily Mail and its ilk, the reality is that as soon as you write and publish a post on MN that post becomes the property of MN, and you lose all right to say what happens to it.

Added to which, you’re posting on a public platform, so again, you have no idea who is sharing it and where and when and to who else.

If people are that afraid of their posts appearing in the DM, then the starting point is probably to not post on a public platform.

I find that referring to it as The Paper that Supported The Blackshirts is effective. No comment of mine has ever been published.

I would agree. See also people who say 'this should be a safe space'. The minute you post here you need to accept that what you have posted is in the public domain. That's the reality of it and if that makes you uncomfortable or puts you in danger then you need to take that into account.

@peak2021

I find that referring to it as The Paper that Supported The Blackshirts is effective. No comment of mine has ever been published.

They just cut it out if they want to quote your post. I doubt that will be the reason none of your posts have been quoted

It's strange why its always the DM that people put in their totally pointless comment when threads from here also get lifted by The Sun and other outlets.

I totally agree with you though. I'm quite sure at no time have the DM seen that kind of comment and been stopped in their tracks

@ peak2021 unless you’ve actually read every single thread that has been posted in every single tabloid ever you can never know that for certain.

But as PP said, if they want to quote your comment they will just remove the “disclaimer”

Also see Twitter. There’s actually an account call Mumsnet Madness which takes threads from here and people comment (in normally a pretty derogatory fashion 😉).

I don't think they are really meaning that they don't give permission (because they can't withhold it). I think the intention is to stop a lazy journalist from just copying and pasting a thread. They have to start picking through to edit out all the 'I hate the DM....' posts.

YANBU.

Yes, it annoys me too. I can’t believe people genuinely think that prefacing their post this way would stop a journalist using it. And all publications use posts from MN - I’ve even seen articles in the hallowed Guardian about it based on MN posts.

Also see Twitter. There’s actually an account call Mumsnet Madness which takes threads from here and people comment (in normally a pretty derogatory fashion 😉). aren’t there similar on Redit as well?

I don't think it's meaningless.

I mean yes it holds zero legal wait, but what newspaper is going to direct people to a page that talks about how awful they are?

@jaffar

I don't think it's meaningless.

I mean yes it holds zero legal wait, but what newspaper is going to direct people to a page that talks about how awful they are?

Very naive!

"I don't think it's meaningless.

I mean yes it holds zero legal wait, but what newspaper is going to direct people to a page that talks about how awful they are?"

I'm pretty certain they edit that out

No thread I start will ever be lifted by the Mail because my username insults the editor. Name change to something like that if you want to stop them lifting it. Content here is in the public domain so there's no reason they can't report it, but they will choose not to if you call yourself GeordieGreigsCourgetteSizedButtPlug or similar.

@peak2021

I find that referring to it as The Paper that Supported The Blackshirts is effective. No comment of mine has ever been published.

You really think that's why??

@jaffar

I don't think it's meaningless.

I mean yes it holds zero legal wait, but what newspaper is going to direct people to a page that talks about how awful they are?

The comments on their own page can be awful.

I really don't think it matters!

@GeordieGreigsButtButtZoom

No thread I start will ever be lifted by the Mail because my username insults the editor. Name change to something like that if you want to stop them lifting it. Content here is in the public domain so there's no reason they can't report it, but they will choose not to if you call yourself GeordieGreigsCourgetteSizedButtPlug or similar.

Sorry but that's rubbish

I've seen loads of posts quoted in the tabloids and on the old Matthew Wright TV show where the names were just pixelated out. Mostly because they contain swearwords.

And YANBU OP

The naivety around this is still astounding. Some comments on this thread proves that.

If you really don't want something copied from MN to somewhere else, the only way to guarantee that won't happen, is not to post it in the first place.

I've seen loads of posts quoted in the tabloids and on the old Matthew Wright TV show where the names were just pixelated out. Mostly because they contain swearwords.

Your last sentence has it. Swear words, pixellated, are fine.

I bet mumsnet madness start threads themselves on mumsnet to take the piss out of. The threads they use often get deleted as trolls

@SnowdropsCrocuses

I bet mumsnet madness start threads themselves on mumsnet to take the piss out of. The threads they use often get deleted as trolls

I'd be amazed if they didn't.

I find it deeply cringy when people start their posts with lines like 'Firstly Fuck off Daily Mail'. Like the Mail aren't going to cut that line out if they re-produce the post for any reason

It makes me cringe when I read peoples 'disclaimers' 😳

I just love when people include it in incredibly mundane posts.

'FUCK OFF DAILY MAIL! Anyway, DH and I can't agree on a paint colour for the living room...'

These people want their thread published, & only mention it to try & get the attention of the the DM.