When wilk Mumsnet or MPs challenge tabloids that take site chats and publish without permission ?

[WillLokireturn]

It really worries me that this is a limited (log in or search) niche forum for relatively safe chats (limited to those that are interested) and that national tabloids steal information, publish it generically as widely, and share information that might be personal only MN site has consent to, without permission of the OP for that wider audience

It so contravenes spirit of permission for this site only and what GDPR means. Why is no one challenging them nor reporting tabloids to regulator for this?

MN is huge. It is also freely available to anyone to read.

Erm yes. And your point is? It's a limited wire that has limited pemission to record and store within confines of this service . But no one is giving explicit permission for tabloids to quote it to a far wider audience. Infact most OPs aren't asked and end up asking for posts to be deleted when tabloids take their personal information and misuse it. It's personal information by all stretches of the term.

It is so wrong

No one is “reporting them to the regulator” because they haven’t breached anything.

They are not “stealing information”, they are using information posters on MN have placed in the public domain available to anyone with an internet connection.

*site not wire 🙈

Er, it’s the internet

@flowery you miss the point. Tabloids do not have permission to take personal information from a limited site with tacit agreement, to a wider generic audience without agreement.

If you put your own personal data on the internet on a website without any restrictions on who can see it, you can’t complain that the data has been shared without your consent

They don’t need permission! Why would they? If they breached some kind of security to get it that might be different but if you put it out there it is available to anyone!

MN is not “limited”. Anyone can read it.

Which part of GDPR do you feel they are in breach of?

I expect there will be a number of "clever people" saying it's the internet. Please reflect and think about what was permission given. Many pp are vulnerable at that time they posted, and want to talk, but will never have given permission for wider sharing in national tabloids. Not theft of their info outside site they'd given consent to share on. GDPR in UK is quite specific about permission, it has to be named to share in my field.

Define personal information, OP. Users consent to having their posts published on this site and thereby accessible to anyone and everyone who reads this site. You do not have to be a member to access this site it is in the public domain, it is not private.

What personal data that posters have not willingly put into the public domain themselves do you feel has been or is being subject to “theft” OP?

You know on Facebook you have all these security settings where you can control who sees your posts? Have you not noticed that we don’t have those on MN? Anyone can see anything and MN is just as publicly available as the Daily Mail.

If you know and regularly use GDPR you would know it has to be named to have permission to share.

Yes the internet is extensive but pp give permission only to MN site for their story. For purposes of getting advice usually.
Maybe, I should direct this to people that regularly use GDPR professionally... ? It's such a breach.

You don't understand GDPR

I regularly use and advise on GDPR. Please point me to which specific clause you feel has been breached by tabloids copying data individuals have chosen to place in the public domain?

Particularly bearing in mind that for something to constitute personal data, an individual has to be identifiable.

Get a grip OP.

🙄🙄

Ok let's start from scratch. GDPR personal information. Permission to share in specific website.
Limited . Purposes, for personal info sharing - for advice and support
Tablid takes information. Not for agreed purposes. Nor for agreed limited audience.
OP asks MN to delete. As misuse of personal data.
But really they are all pretty annoyed that weren't asked and their personal info was misused.

I'm not sure how a number of pp have really misunderstood, as it's a valid concern.

MN is a public site. It's not an 'agreed limited audience'

🙄🙄 it's very worrying to me that commenting so far PPs cannot debate meaning of personal data eg for a start.
It's an open discussion that ought be had rather than pp pretend they know answer.

The bottom line is: if you don't want your innermosts lifted, don't post them.

It's not personal data if the subject is not identifiable.
And, when you post here you are putting your post into the public domain.

GDPR is not relevant.

@catinboots99 🙄🙄 And yet it is named website, only one that had explicit permission for posts. Under GDPR permission is limited & explicit for that purpose only You may feel UK GDPR has limitations and doesn't deal well with internet information, but that doesn't mean printed tabloids can bypass.

The meaning of personal data is clearly defined in legislation, it doesn’t require debate. An individual must be identifiable, which in the majority of posts on this site, they are not.

Consent is not required to share information an individual has freely chosen to make available to the entire world on a public website.

I’m not “pretending” I know the answer. I actually do. Which you do not.

Flowery you're so patient.