"on MN this week" in the Daily Mail

[StealthBearWipesBumOnDailyMail]

Thread no 2

silver just posted what I was trying to say but much more sensibly

Well, that rules out me posting anything about my inlaws, my parents, my siblings, my husband, my marriage, my friends, my work, my education, my health, or my child.

Other than that, it won't affect me.

Maybe obtuse was an unkind choice of word - but saying in effect "stop being hysterical, it's not likely to happen" isn't a very constructive response.

People DO have these concerns, so telling to just brace up and stop worrying is kind of pointless.

i think "stop being hysterical, it's not likely to happen" is one of the more sensible things ive read on these threads

problem is it doesn't change how people feel though does it

you can't tell people to unfeel their feelings

the only thing that will work is that over time, people get reassured and I hope that time does prove the reassurance they need

I need extra cash, think I may tout the bumsex threads to The Star or The Sport. How hard can it be just cutting and pasting?

I could be a journo too then

Absolutely agree with Nacy66 and Shiney.

"he only thing that will work is that over time, people get reassured and I hope that time does prove the reassurance they need "

well, I think there are other things that could work.

For eg MNHQ could request a right to read the copy prior to filing, in exchange for permission to link their name to the column and use the archives.

I don't think that would be an unreasonable request.

They would then be able to check that really sensitive issues weren't being covered and perhaps contact a poster before publication if there were fears that they might find that particular column an intrusion.

Ok well very quick, blackberried legal opinion appears to be that this may, indeed, constitute an infringement of copyright... (remind me never to trust my husband...)

I think a lot of people forget about how vulnerable some of the posters on here are, some people post some amazingly personal stuff, they have to as MN is the only place they can do it.
not everyone gets loads of support in RL, and sometimes even if they do there are things they just can't talk about in RL.
there are places on mn that should be out of bounds to lazy journalist, just out of common decency, but seeing as this is the daily mail where will they go next, bereavement,SN,antenatal testing"choices.....

There are numerous threads where I've talked about my family situation, or my MIL, or my son. Those are comments buried in what must be millions of threads, so I don't worry overmuch. If it's in the DM, I may well be identifiable, and my MIL will almost certainly read it. She would then have my user ID and can search MN to her heart's content. That's a can of worms I'd really rather avoid. She's my son's grandmother and that matters more than a website.

The MN books talk about issues specific to various child rearing stages. They aren't personally identifiable, and they aren't read by a mass of the population. This is, IMO, very, very different. I'm not saying it's wrong - it's for each individual to determine what they're comfortable with, obviously, and probably many people will either not care or be positively flattered - but I personally will not post about my MIL, or a dispute with my mother or husband, or info a SN sibling when just trying to help someone understand that "high functioning" doesn't mean "misdiagnosed", if it's going to be served up with a twist in a national newspaper. Frankly, I value my real life far too highly. It's my loss, not MN's, but it makes me pretty sad. I like this place.

oooooh

Surely in any sane world, a journalist should be at least attempting to seek someone's consent before quoting them - and their personal problems- in a national paper. Let alone misquoting them!

I think 2shoes is right.I think it is shoddy and invasive tbh.I have a very unique and complicated medical history and could be recognised v easily and there are many people on here with unique home and family situations and are herer for those very reasons.

(ooohing at Justine's post btw)

oh well that's good isn't it?

That at least gives you a negotiating stick for the Mail.

A column could be great and very useful, but I think what concerns people is that the only editorial power rests with the Mail who, frankly, owes MNers nothing and won't care if anyone gets hurt.

If MNHQ could request some right of viewing then I think people would feel much reassured as MN has a great record of responding sensitively to issues. And it would give MNHQ confidence that the column wouldn't cause problems for the site in terms of offensive opinions/misrepresentation/upset.

But then MNHQ would be seen to be tacitly endorsing and accepting the DM ethos - advertising without the monetary contribution and IMHO just wrong...!!

err youngvisitor, I think you'll see lower down that I mentioned that mumsnet should be informed before they quote posters (so I wasn't just saying blindly that time would heal everything)

but even if copy is run past mumsnet, that doesnt' mean the copy is run exactly in that format. In fact, I think Justine may have been stung by that once before!

gosh, this will run and run, won't it.

Indeed yes it would certainly give us a negotiating stick as you say TYV - would folks be happy with that solution - let us know...