Update from MNHQ addressing the recent images posted on the site

[JustineMumsnet]

Hi all,
There have been a number of threads discussing what happened re the posting of CSA images on site and so I want to be absolutely clear: we would never seek to shut down reasonable criticism and we're taking on board all the feedback and will be carefully considering how we can improve our procedures and moderation to prevent this happening again.

As a temporary measure, we have suspended all image posting and will soon be implementing AI filters to flag illegal/disturbing images before they appear on the site. We’re also liaising with external specialists to see if there are any further tools we can employ to help us prevent this from happening again in the future. We reported it to the police first thing the morning after the attack and we have a follow up meeting with them tomorrow.

It's also pretty clear from what we can see behind the scenes that there is an ongoing, coordinated effort from trolls to further inflame these discussions, and cause as much disruption as possible. We are taking steps to remove bad faith actors, but we know this can be frustrating for those who just want to express your views about what happened. If you come across any posts that seem designed to stir up more conflict rather than contribute constructively, please do report them - your reports really help us to act swiftly. Many thanks for your patience while we work to sort this out.

It is not just sites like Reddit where you have individual forums/boards set up by users that rely on volunteer mods, pretty much all online chat forums, including other profitable groups like the chat functions on many Bingo/gambling sites.

Whether or not it is right that a profit-making business relies on volunteers is another discussion entirely, but I do feel it is unfair to call MN out on this when it is pretty much industry standard.

If your "automated moderation controls" didn't flag up reports that there was illegal CSA images being hosted on Mumsnet, it is nowhere near fit for purpose.

Your obfuscation on this thread, and refusal to respond to basic, reasonable questions regarding this incident is speaking volumes.

Bingo chat moderators are paid. I used to do the job.

Of course they didn't.
Registrations = posts = page clicks = revenue.

The spirit of Mumsnet

Thank you for letting us know @JustineMumsnet What a dreadful thing to happen. I am so glad I went to bed early-ish that night. I couldn't bear to see anything like that, and my heart goes out to anyone who did see these images.

I'm not talking about paying for counselling or whatever, merely providing links to eg victim support and the internet watch foundation and any other relevant sources of already available support/advice. I can't see how that can be construed as any sort of admission of liability.

Good to hear. I'm actually really shocked that this has never been the case in a business established 25 years ago.

Maybe that's me, as I have a background in contingency planning within the Govt, and literally all eventualities are covered in a comprehensive contingency plan. So your senior and key staff are identified, and different scenarios are all mapped out and allocated to different staff members (with appropriate levels of escalation which would involve all members of the core contingency management team) So, for example, an aeroplane crashes into your HQ, you scramble your team and a temporary workspace and get straight on with media comms, family liason etc. Similarly, a natural disaster, terror or major cyber attack all have simikar but specific detailed steps and protocols to follow. A business should never be left for a minute in the hands of anyone who is not able to contact senior management (even if that's via someone else within the organisation)

All members of a contingency team should have both paper and electronic copies of the plan on portable devices. The plan is updated monthly by a nominated person. Changes to telephone numbers are noted immediately etc. I'm sorry if I'm stating anything obvious, I just assumed all businesses had these things in place for every imaginable eventuality at varying levels of severity.

Just available is not enough. They need to have full access and powers and be logged on and dealing with the reports that Nightwatch can't see.

Nightwatch can be "extra" or "back up" they shouldn't be the first line of defence.

Surely illegal images of CSA wouldn’t be found on normal web- so any links to illegal stuff would be on darkweb and not accessible by a simple link. ( it was links I was talking about)

Sadly not the case!

@kittensinthekitchen yes obfuscation is a good word: the fact is that due to a lack of basic filters many (including me) have now been exposed to serious images of child abuse and Mumsnet became the publisher of such images.
Proper moderation would have been a useful second line of defence.

Exactly! "Contactable" means a volunteer will be the first line of defence responsible for escalating to the senior person.

I don't think it is unfair, because Mumsnet markets itself as a woman-centred place that fights for women's rights etc etc. Using unpaid female labour for roles that are often paid doesn't sit right with that ethos. Gambling sites aren't pretending to be bastions of women's rights so are held to a different standard.

It's been distressing for everyone.

Thankfully I wasnt looking at the site when the images were posted. The changes being made now should have happened far sooner.

Posters were encouraged by Mumsnet's unpaid - and seemingly untrained - out of hours Night Watch set up to share links to CSA images being hosted on Mumsnet, on the the clearweb.

I'm so sorry that you were forced to see those images. I hope you've been able to locate a source of support over that, despite the lack of Mumsnet signposting

Yes we should be as loud as fuck about it. You can write to the news outlets to flag this as a story. I have.

The updates are wishy washy, like someone who has made a massive boo boo and is massively trying to deflect attention. Instead focusing on asking people to report PPs if they are overly critical or "causing conflict".

This isn't good enough MN for a major website with a massive public audience and multimillion pound revenue. Each of your updates becomes more and more ludicrous. You are not acting like a professional and accountable organisation, you are trying to look like a side hustle run out of your living room.

Odd isn't it that the press isn't all over this.

Just to clarify, I don't hold the Night Watch volunteers in any way responsible for this. It's very clear they have no been sufficiently trained or supported in how to deal with this sort of thing.
I hope they are OK, and have managed to access support ❤️

I must say I'm concerned about the line in the op saying certain threads were deleted because of "bad faith actors"

This sounds dangerously like it comes from the Elon Musk school of free speech - 'say what you like unless I don't like it'.

Perhaps I have misunderstood the original post but mumsnet needs to clarify why other threads addressing this were deleted and who they meant by "bad faith actors".

And it's appalling the Nite Watch are unpaid. Doesn't matter if they're experienced users who have "kindly" offered or not, Mumsnet is taking advantage of their good nature (and potentially exploring a person's need to feel useful) in order to reduce costs & not pay them, which is disgraceful.

I assume MN had processes in place under the Online Safety Act anyway.

People need to be aware that Ofcom has made it clear that it realises that it is impossible to stop all illegal content and harmful content, but platforms have to have adequate measures in place to stop the vast majority of it (and take it down if it is posted despite those measures).

Those who are worried about this could do worse than go to the Ofcom website and read their materials about online safety.

MN has had its procedures tested and will no doubt risk assess and improve them (which is exactly what Ofcom envisages happening).

Link here: Online safety - Ofcom and Ofcom's approach to implementing the Online Safety Act - Ofcom

For example,this thread was straightforward and useful.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5267265-to-wonder-how-many-people-are-aware-of-what-happened-on-mn-last-night-tw?latest=1

Admittedly I didn't read the entire thread before it was taken down, but nor did I see anything that warranted it.

...unless of course it was taken down because mumsnet couldn't control the narrative

I have been critical at MN's response but I don't think it will be helpful to have this all over the press.

It is not just MN that would be criticised, it would be the over night volunteers too, despite the fact they did nothing wrong. I really think they have been through enough.

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/make-a-complaint/complain-about-a-video-sharing-platform-vsp/sites-and-apps/harmful-content/

Leaving this here for anyone who is affected by this and not happy with the response from MN.

You can say this is in bad faith and delete this MNHQ or go ahead and delete my account. I believe in public accountability and responsibility for a platform as big as yours, with so many users who have personally relied upon your website in their deepest darkest hours, only to have shambles of a response from this God awful incident.

much appreciated - thanks so much