Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Concerns about racism

1000 replies

PandoraSocks · 05/08/2025 08:33

Hi there Mumsnet HQ

Many of us are concerned about the uptick of hatred, xenophobia and racism on the site over the past couple of weeks. Most of the bigotry is focused on asylum seekers. MNHQ will of course delete racism etc. if reported, but this has gone way beyond a few hateful posts.

Links below to three examples of threads which have descended into real nastiness.

Cheers.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/in_the_news/5385273-civil-unrest-whats-really-going-on?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5385914-do-you-believe-there-will-be-a-civil-war?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5386073-to-be-so-fed-up-amd-disheartened-with-all-the-xenophobia?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share

OP posts:
Thread gallery
12
MrsBennetsPoorNerves · 05/08/2025 12:52

DeLaRuiz · 05/08/2025 12:45

You are discounting that people express themselves the way they are able and you are discounting their feelings and responses because you dislike the way they speak.

Yes, I do dislike it if people are making explicitly racist comments and/or spreading misinformation. Are you OK with this?

You seem to be suggesting that some people are simply not capable of expressing themselves without saying racist things or spreading lies. You obviously have a very low estimation of their intellect. Are you suggesting that we should therefore tolerate their lies and racism as a reasonable adjustment because they're too stupid to express themselves in a different way?

TheAutumnCrow · 05/08/2025 12:53

Brainworm · 05/08/2025 12:40

The requests/ suggestion/ demand for MN to fact check doesn’t align with what Mumsnet is. It has never fact checked and I can’t see it moving in this direction. The model is for posters to provide push back and challenge where they see fit.

‘Society’ can move to the left or the right, and as it does so, it is likely that MN posts will reflect this If people are becoming less tolerant of more susceptible to posts that promote intolerance, we would go well to unpack why this is as opposed to wanting to dismiss what is, allegedly, an ever growing number of people. I don’t read any of the threads on migration of immigration, this isn’t something I used MN for. However, this thread gives the impression that the posts that invite intolerance and division are more compelling than factual posts that challenge that position. I tend to think that those seeking to promote tolerance and inclusion might want to think about how to win over the good faith posters who are being pulled towards an opposing view.

MN position, as far as I’m aware, has always been to remove posts that don’t comply with UK law, but beyond that, to provide a platform for all views - even if they offend or upset.

Fair enough. I think my concern is that we’re seeing a worrying increase in the number of threads/posts which are not really reflecting public opinion so much as cynically and deliberately attempting to affect it.

Coupled with racist tropes, fake statistics and the use of AI, we’re in for a bumpy ride.

Brainworm · 05/08/2025 12:55

PandoraSocks · 05/08/2025 12:48

I tend to think that those seeking to promote tolerance and inclusion might want to think about how to win over the good faith posters who are being pulled towards an opposing view

Many of us, me included, have put a lot of time and effort into posting verifiable facts to counteract the racism and lies.

It is an absolute waste of time.

These posters don't want to be won over. They are here simply to stir up hate and racism and signpost people the likes of Yaxley-Lennon.

I tend to ignore posts and posters who are entrenched and only interested in bringing a narrow lens to the discussion and just keep the discussion going with those engaging in the substantive issues.

I expect there are posters on opposing sides who truly believe they are on the right side of history. This tends to come from being selective about which factors they attend to and/or giving virtuous meaning to their own priorities and vilifying others’.

ilovesooty · 05/08/2025 12:55

Jumpthewaves · 05/08/2025 10:57

I agree with the op. Too much hate and lies being spread on some of these threads. Healthy discussion should definitely be encouraged, but it's just become nasty.

The third thread on the OP's post was as unpleasant as anything I've ever seen on the site. It made me wonder if I even want to read and post any more. The goading and pile on about stickers in the early hours of the morning was particularly nasty. I've been targeted by some of those posters before so was reluctant to intervene.
I'd also add that some posters contributing to the nastiest threads are also to be found being vocal on threads advocating totally inhumane treatment in prisons and the reintroduction of the death penalty.

ilovesooty · 05/08/2025 13:03

Mavvera · 05/08/2025 12:47

Do you want MN to just be for lefties to chat amongst themselves about great it is.

Here we go again.

You don't have to be on the left of politics to be disgusted by racism.

GrammarTeacher · 05/08/2025 13:04

OP. Thanks for posting. The past two days on here have been the worst I’ve ever seen. I’m a regular challenger and I have had to stop because it’s affecting me. I’ve also never had so many requests for review upheld.
Those people above saying we’re wrong have either missed all the comments we are talking about or are fine with wishing a traumatic death on a child purely due to where they were born (and that was the least of it).
There are plenty of people I’ve encountered on here with differing views to mine on which party to vote for and a range of individual issues that I have had very civil and interesting conversations with. Threads recently have been something else and it is beyond time to invoke the paradox of intolerance.

C8H10N4O2 · 05/08/2025 13:07

MrsBennetsPoorNerves · 05/08/2025 12:23

There is a fundamental problem with the way that MN moderates imo. I think they operate on a quick, "tickbox" approach that requires minimal thought or engagement from the moderators.

I was on a thread the other day with a ridiculous OP who was very rude and argumentative towards anyone who didn't agree with her. Someone made a very mild and fairly inoffensive statement about the OP sounding "bonkers". It was deleted when the OP reported it, presumably because MNHQ felt that it fell into the category of "personal attack" and it therefore ticked a box of not being allowed.

Meanwhile, there are many vile, blatantly racist posts which are left to stand because they don't quite tick the moderators' boxes. There is no nuance or judgement involved as far as I can tell. So if you learn to bypass the talk guidelines, you can be as racist and as xenophobic as you like, with no consequence.

I wish MN would adopt a different approach, but as others have pointed out, it may suit their purposes quite well if the bunfights are boosting their revenue. So the only option may be to vote with our feet and to alert the advertisers on our way out. Not all brands will want to be associated with the free expression of racism and xenophobia.

Like you upthread, I’ve reported factually incorrect posts of this type and had the “challenge on thread” answer. I have at times explicitly asked in a report for the thread context and all of a poster’s posts to be considered - that seems less effective these days, mostly only the one post which will often not be “enough” in isolation.

So perhaps if MN want us to do any fact checking put in place a proper process along the lines of community notes where we can flag up blatant falsehoods with usernames attached to the notes. Otherwise MN just becomes the place to go or a bunfight and whilst that may increase clicks in the short term it dies over the medium to long term.

This desire from MN to “counter on the thread” is at direct odds with their “do not engage with trolls/troll hunt” message.

I’ve said before I’d restrict the ability to change username, its far too easily abused. If people want to retain the ability to change then maybe one username in one topic or a request process to change name so that it requires a reason - just a step which takes longer than the automatic “switch to shitstirringname” whilst posting all sweetness and light elsewhere (which I’d classify as trolling).

I agree with this from @Saucery as well:

People should be allowed to express disquiet about what they observe to be happening in their communities. They should not be allowed to spout racist twaddle. That’s for MN moderation to act on and imo they need to be sharper and less complacent about it Achieving the first part requires the second.

@PhilippaGeorgiou There is no need to have wide-ranging boards - there are plenty of places elsewhere on the internet where people can whip up their own brand of frenzy

AIBU has a lot to answer for. Its killed a lot of the topics and combined with endless username changes just creates bunfight central. Just what every new or struggling mother needs.

MrsBennetsPoorNerves · 05/08/2025 13:08

MurdoMunro · 05/08/2025 12:51

Yeah @MrsBennetsPoorNerves and others who’ve said similar. Maybe it’s just time to go. It’ll be no loss to Mumsnet, they can find plenty to replace me I’m sure so it’s not about flouncing or taking a stand. I don’t want to, so much community now is online and it’s so hard to find one that stays on the right side of the line between lively discussion and pages of lobbing crap at the ‘others’. Ditched Facebook more than a decade ago, then Twitter. I suppose I was naive to think a moderated site would be able to hold a community better.

Tbh, I would prefer MN to stop moderating altogether than to stick with the current approach to moderation that we have now.

I do take @Brainworm's point about MN being a discussion forum with no responsibility for fact checking, but as soon as you introduce any kind of subjective moderation, you enter into the territory of deciding which content is acceptable and which content isn't. So in recent days, we've had MN deciding that it is unacceptable to call a fairly obnoxious poster "bonkers" but it's fine to spread lies which promote racial hatred. I can't get my head around that logic, personally.

tobee · 05/08/2025 13:09

There's also a proliferation of threads popping up that have a seemingly "liberal" title but actual feel like they could be fake to encourage posters to push back against the op. The "I'm so worried about a reform government/civil war/riots" that seem to occur daily.

They have the added factor of whipping up general anxiety.

Lalala12345 · 05/08/2025 13:09

TheAutumnCrow · 05/08/2025 12:53

Fair enough. I think my concern is that we’re seeing a worrying increase in the number of threads/posts which are not really reflecting public opinion so much as cynically and deliberately attempting to affect it.

Coupled with racist tropes, fake statistics and the use of AI, we’re in for a bumpy ride.

Agreed. Social media and the internet broadly writ is a real cesspit, and with the normalisation of misinformation and the spread of AI its only going to/getting worse.

DeLaRuiz · 05/08/2025 13:15

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

MrsBennetsPoorNerves · 05/08/2025 13:20

Perhaps the solution for MN would be to stop all moderation other than deleting posts which contain illegal content and unauthorised advertising. The place would still be a cesspit, but it already is. And at least everyone would be clear on where MN draws the line and expectations could be managed accordingly.

My biggest issue at the moment is that their over-zealous moderation on some threads, including the deletion of some really quite innocuous posts, gives the clear impression that they are officially sanctioning the racist bile which they are allowing to stand. Is that really the impression that they want to be giving?

C8H10N4O2 · 05/08/2025 13:21

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

writing in everyday language != inability to avoid common racist tropes.

BIossomtoes · 05/08/2025 13:23

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Does anyone understand the first sentence? I’ve read it four times now and still none the wiser.

MrsBennetsPoorNerves · 05/08/2025 13:23

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

No, I'm struggling with racists and liars.

This thread is about racism and misinformation. If you don't have anything to contribute, please feel free not to post.

If you can't answer the question contained in my post, that's fine. I understand.

FreezeDriedStrawberries · 05/08/2025 13:26

pointythings · 05/08/2025 09:00

I suspect the only thing MNHQ can do is what they did in the runup to the 2024 GE, which is banish every single one of these to the Politics topic, where they get less visibility.

Or perhaps we could have a special topic called Xenophobia Corner?

Or perhaps we could have a special topic called Xenophobia Corner?

Only thing with that though is it risks becoming an echo chamber.
I'd personally rather it was out in the open where it gets challenged more instead of like minded people just further back clapping themselves/radicalising entrenching themselves more.

LadyKenya · 05/08/2025 13:26

BIossomtoes · 05/08/2025 13:23

Does anyone understand the first sentence? I’ve read it four times now and still none the wiser.

Edited

Just a lot of words to avoid answering the question that was posed to them. The fact that they chose not to answer that simple question is telling, but hey ho.

MrsBennetsPoorNerves · 05/08/2025 13:27

LadyKenya · 05/08/2025 13:26

Just a lot of words to avoid answering the question that was posed to them. The fact that they chose not to answer that simple question is telling, but hey ho.

Exactly!

Shedmistress · 05/08/2025 13:31

PandoraSocks · 05/08/2025 10:44

Well we are seeing yours right now, and that is fine.

I genuinely don't ever report posts apart from spam.

Even ones that I don't agree with, or ones that are disgusting or stupid or hateful.

I guess being in the gender wars for so long and having so many relentless death and rape threats toughens you up a bit.

I am afraid that the UK is in such a pickle and MN is such a huge magnet for wind ups and trolling that this isn't even the start of it. It is only ever going to get worse.

I wasn't joking about the safe space board. But like the FWR board attracts so many anti-women men, it would be a red rag to a bull and be inundated within minutes.

PhilippaGeorgiou · 05/08/2025 13:33

LadyKenya · 05/08/2025 13:26

Just a lot of words to avoid answering the question that was posed to them. The fact that they chose not to answer that simple question is telling, but hey ho.

This is where the bunfights start though, isn't it. You make a comment and someone responds to the comment. Instead of answering them you start throwing around personal insults...Let the bunfight commence, because the personal comments have done their job - deflected from the serious / informed discussionthat might happen.

MiniPantherOwner · 05/08/2025 13:38

BIossomtoes · 05/08/2025 13:23

Does anyone understand the first sentence? I’ve read it four times now and still none the wiser.

Edited

Maybe they asked ChatGPT to formulate a response in the style of Boris Johnson. It makes about as much sense.

Tinytigertail · 05/08/2025 13:39

Thank you for this thread. After many years on this forum, I am so saddened by the posts I'm reading. There seems to be a mob mentality that, if representative of the general public, is scary as hell. I'd love not to have these threads on my feed.

FreezeDriedStrawberries · 05/08/2025 13:40

GladioliGreen · 05/08/2025 11:04

I had a discussion with mumsnet before about posters using misinformation to spread hate and they said that they wouldn't do anything about it and to challange the misinformation myself. This makes sense from a business perspective for mumsnet, they get more content on their website, more content means more clicks, means more money for them from adsesnse.

I've had that response before as well.
"Why don't you challenge on the thread"
Why should I? It's exhausting and pointless trying to reason with some. They're too set in their fear mongering/everyone's out to get me way.
If it's like that for me who's white, goodness knows how it feels for someone who isn't and may experience racism every day. They shouldn't have to "challenge" or try and "educate" people (for want of a better word)

MrsBennetsPoorNerves · 05/08/2025 13:42

MiniPantherOwner · 05/08/2025 13:38

Maybe they asked ChatGPT to formulate a response in the style of Boris Johnson. It makes about as much sense.

I wish the laughing emoji was still available.

FreezeDriedStrawberries · 05/08/2025 13:42

It's interesting that MN are clearly aware of this thread as they've deleted a few posts, but so far have declined to comment

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread