To be uncomfortable with the Mail Online doxing people

[NotAKnowitall]

I know I'm already being unreasonable by reading the Daily Fail, I'm sorry. I don't usually and I swear when I do it's more of a "ffs, what are the tories pushing this time". I certainly don't read it for facts.

Anyway. I've looked at the Mail Online website a few times this month and have noticed an ongoing trend of doxing people. The one I've noticed today is the women who shouted at the presenter on the news yesterday ("do you love fossil fuel more than your kids").

For those who don't know what doxing is, I've copied and pasted these definitions:

Search for and publish private or identifying information about (a particular individual) on the internet, typically with malicious intent

And

Doxing (or doxxing) is the act of releasing personal information about an individual with the aim of outing their true identity, embarrassing them publicly, or taking personal or political revenge. The meaning of doxing can be traced to the term “dropping docs,” with doxing attacks seeking to expose the personal information or identity of targeted individuals.

So now we all know what doxing is.

The Mail Online have just released an article about the young woman which I feel has crossed the line (not the first time) and I just feel sick about it to be honest. They've obviously done it maliciously because of her views (which are obviously different than those of a tory paper) and to send their hate army her way. Right now, they've listed her parent's names, brother's names, where she grew up in south wales, middle name of one of her brothers, what her brother does for a living, how much the family home is worth, old university, what her job is, her past employment, her full name. I know a google search will probably show some of this information anyway but this is a full on witch hunt orchestrated by the Mail Online as punishment for her political views.

I've noticed with these tory rags, it's a constant stream of doxing individuals whose political beliefs don't align with theirs while blatantly ignoring the people who are actually doing something wrong. Where's the article about the tory donor (with links to Kwasi) who shorted the pound? The story about ERG subs paid for by the tax payer? Story about any of the corruption scandals involving any of the tory donors? There may be one article released here and there regarding those but it's never written with so many personal details or to incite this much hatred. Aibu to be this fed up of it or has it just become normalised now.

She is a hypocrite.
She is a hypocrite.

She loves fossil fuels.
She loves fossil fuels.

I'm not sure what she wants people to do?

Another of those, do as I say and not as I do?

@NotAKnowitall not sure if you've been asked, but are you Indigo or her mum? Why out of all the actual vicious doxxing cases out there would you think this is an example that needs sympathy??

They put up her information to show the hypocracy.

It was all in the public domain already.

And the line she came out with was - Do you love your kids more than fossil fuels?

So they just showed information about her own personal use of fossil fuels, and it's all already in the public domain.

@NotAKnowitall do you have an issue with people trawling the social media accounts of people in the public eye and holding them to account for things that they have posted in the past e.g. in the summer a number of cricket players were reprimanded for posts they had made over 10 years ago. Was that okay in your view?

This - we don’t even do this for rapists and murderers.

Where were the articles giving Wayne Couzens’ parents and siblings names and addresses to set the mob on them? What about Levi Bellfield, why aren’t the Mail telling us how much his sister’s house cost and where her kids go to school?

But “menaces to society” like this woman who, as far as I can tell, shouted something on TV, gets her whole extended family exposed to harassment from any nutcase who reads the Mail.

I think it's always best to make sure social media is firmly locked down or deleted before becoming a public hypocrite. It might not be pleasant that people go through your social media to take up any dirt. But they can, it's easy, and it's the world we now live in. Rather than getting distressed and angry about it, try to take steps to reduce it happening.

That's not really a good comparison is it. Wayne Couzens and Levi Bellfield are in prison, so won't be effected by people knowing these details. Their family however are and there are loads of articles about their wives, partners, children etc. Just pick up any trashy magazine or put their details into a browser and you'll find loads of articles.
A better comparison would be Liam Norton from Insulate Britain. Without even opening the first two articles I can see that he was 'shamed', branded a hypocrite and that he is an electrician. No doubt if I read the articles I'll learn more about him.

I can see both sides. And do agree with you to a point OP.

I myself was saying on a thread a couple of days back that posters shouldn’t link to one of the individuals personal Twitter accounts. Mainly because I don’t think they are very well mentally.

But I do have to accept their argument that it’s showing hypocrisy and causing disruption to others lives so inviting disruption themselves. That is correct. Can’t argue. But I do think perhaps we need to be the bigger person especially when in my eyes some of these individuals aren’t very well.

And no I am not saying everyone is unwell who protests or who has views about oil or climate change. But being really upset crying that your future is stolen at the age of mid twenties or screaming about killing future children whilst protests literally risk killing children through stopping emergency services here and now is not someone mentally ok.

Do I think when you go in a Tv interview you invite more invasion to your personal life than a video taken on top of the gantry. Probably. But should they have allowed them on TV when they are clearly not ok - no. It’s exploitative.

And the line she came out with was - Do you love your kids more than fossil fuels?
let’s face it she has a point!

But her family info? I mean they're not part of the story.

It's tricky to know where the line is in this scenario - it could be argued she is a public figure and she herself has put her name out there. Going after family members and smearing people by association is absolutely not acceptable though.

I find it a lot more indefensible when the media "expose" people who have no public profile whatsoever simply because that person has posted some wrongthink opinions online. (There was one such in the Times fairly recently - I'm staggered that they think that was in the public interest.)

Exactly this!

Read it and own it, stop with the craven apology before you make your point, you don't have to justify your reading choices to anyone.

Yet with her holidays, car and trips to the protests she has a higher carbon footprint than me.

YANBU. Even if she'd committed a crime, it wouldn't justify their dragging her family members into it!

I had an experience many years ago when the DM repeatedly tried to press me for potentially identifying information about a vulnerable person. To have given the information would have completely broken my workplace ethical code, and I didn't. This wasn't politics-related, but in the aid of a potential 'human interest' story. Ever since then, I've been even more distrustful of the DM than I was to start with!

Thats ridiculous. The reality is right now it’s costing me god knows how much to heat my home. I would absolutely LOVE too not have to use that energy and pay these outrageous prices.

But I love my 6 month old. I am not fucking around with heating my home with a newborn. I am sure it would be ok to not have the heating on - until it isn’t ok. And that’s not an experiment I am going to conduct on my child. It’s just crazy. What reality do they think people live in.

To paraphrase The Princess Bride: "I do not think that word means what you think it means."

It is not doxxing it is reporting. She expressed views that do not correspond with her conduct. She did it in an emotive way. They dug around as reporters do and found that. Therefore she is a hypocrite and a histrionic one; These are facts in the public domain.

Why are you constantly reading MailOnline if you don't like it?

We have a close friend who due to his job and a particular political event (not something he did wrong but was not popular with the right wing press/ politicians) had intimate details of his life, home, wife, their relationship and children published and raked over not only in the tabloids but The Times & Telegraph. All of which had nothing to do with the subject being discussed but being used to try to discredit what he was doing. It was seriously horrible.
DH have discussed it quite a bit and it's one of the reasons that puts us off getting involved in some stuff we do to deeply.

Totally agree.

There is no public interest in publishing details of her family and upbringing. None whatsoever. But mockery sells papers, so....