Page 8 | Banned for calling out dogwhistling posts

DebbieHurry · 2025-08-22T06:43:03+00:00

Yesterday, there was yet another dogwhistlng, vague post on the lines of " Should I send my kids back to school in September? Social media warns of a terrorist attack". This is about the 5th such post in the last 10 days. All by posters spreading panic and fear. I have reported in the past and MN has ignored it. Posts continue to mushroom. Yesterday, I posted telling people not to get news from Tiktok and pointed out that there have been a spate of such posts. My posts were deleted, and then my account was banned. My previous username was @KateMiskin. Could @MN please explain why they allow blatant scaremongering and dogwhistling on a parenting site when the police commissioner has urged people not to spread rumours? And why my account was deleted? I said nothing offensive or that broke the rules. I have been a member for over 20 years.

genpop · 26/08/2025 10:22

I see the latest goady post about processing people offshore has actually been deleted by Mumsnet. I suspect it won't be long until another one appears 😞

PrincessofWells · 26/08/2025 10:24

I've just told one creator of a goady racist thread to piss off we don't want them here. I think I might be banned 😂 If I am banned, don't forget good will prevail, but we might have to fight for it . . .

PandoraSocks · 26/08/2025 10:24

PrincessofWells · 26/08/2025 10:24

I've just told one creator of a goady racist thread to piss off we don't want them here. I think I might be banned 😂 If I am banned, don't forget good will prevail, but we might have to fight for it . . .

That thread has been deleted so you are probably OK.😁

Serpentstooth · 26/08/2025 10:25

Agree Serafina but if we don't call attention to it, and complain vociferously, it just becomes normalised and enters mainstream thinking. This is happening.now, witness the less than adequate response from MN. Keep on being a mouthy woman, it's all we've got.

noblegiraffe · 26/08/2025 10:34

What we’ve tried to explain is that not everything reported as disinformation meets that threshold. It’s reasonable for posters to raise something they’ve seen elsewhere for discussion that doesn’t automatically mean they’re trying to spread panic or lies.

@BeckyAMumsnet

Disinformation doesn’t stop being disinformation though just because the poster posting it doesn’t know it’s disinformation (or you think they don’t know, I certainly disagree).

Schools being at risk of an imminent terror attack, however it is dressed up or whoever it is posted by is always disinformation. It is a calculated lie spread online to whip up fear of migrants.

Russian troll farms actually rely on innocent posters to spread their lies, it’s part of the disinformation model.

To attempt to engage with your reasoning- why do you think it stops being disinformation if it is posted by a ‘genuine’ poster? In fact, doesn’t it being posted by a genuine-looking poster make it more harmful?

SerafinasGoose · 26/08/2025 10:38

Serpentstooth · 26/08/2025 10:25

Agree Serafina but if we don't call attention to it, and complain vociferously, it just becomes normalised and enters mainstream thinking. This is happening.now, witness the less than adequate response from MN. Keep on being a mouthy woman, it's all we've got.

I don't somehow think I will struggle with that 😁

DuncinToffee · 26/08/2025 10:47

Kreepture · 26/08/2025 10:11

"Maybe we can do with a report thread or report poster button"

There is one? If you click/tap on the report button on the post, you can put a note in the report box explaining exactly what you're reporting it for.

Show quote history

I know but if one poster floods the thread you end up with reporting lots of individual posts rather than the poster itself.

But agree you can ask MN to look at the poster in the comment box.

Baninarama · 26/08/2025 10:49

Serpentstooth · 26/08/2025 10:04

Times have changed, MNHQ, its time for your guidelines to be examined to decide whether they're now fit for purpose. Your lengthy exposition does nothing to reassure those of us who have expressed concern at what appears to be allowing MN to become simply another social media cesspit catering to far right agitators with a sinister agenda. If that's how MN wishes to progress then be good enough to let us know so that those of us who find it intolerable can leave, with our concerns unaddressed.

Exactly this. There appears to be a concerted attempt to spark 'discussions' on services such as Mumsnet with a particular anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant bent. MNHQ needs to wise up.

SpryUmberPoet · 26/08/2025 11:11

There is a user currently spamming mulyiple threads on the CITME board with a Facebook video on how the 7th October attacks were an inside job. I tried reporting them but mumsnet do not see a problem with it.

I have spoken to multiple Jewish mothers who used to find mumsnet a helpful resource, but have left because if the antisemitism that has been allowed to fester over the past couple of years. There are comments that would have been immediately deleted two or three years ago but that are now allowed to stand. Things that aren't even dogwhistly but blatant.

PandoraSocks · 26/08/2025 11:26

@SpryUmberPoet what did MNHQ say? That is unacceptable.

TheTeasmaid · 26/08/2025 11:43

noblegiraffe · 26/08/2025 09:40

@BeckyAMumsnet disinformation is always intended to cause harm. Perhaps not by the poster spreading it, but they are unwittingly doing the work of the people it originated from (in the case of the school terrorist attack disinformation, this definitely comes from far right Twitter, possibly originating from a foreign bot).

Mumsnet allowing these threads to stand is giving this disinformation a far wider platform, and it is presenting it to parents - the intended target. On these threads people are asking for more information on the (fake) rumours.

I don’t think these threads are genuinely started by concerned parents. You appear to be erring on the side of caution and believing that they are. You want the concerned parent to have the disinformation challenged, but the actual outcome is the disinformation reaches a far wider audience. You are then relying on unpaid posters to challenge it to stop the disinformation being believed. But what if we do a bad job? What if the posts challenging the disinformation are deleted for troll hunting or insults?

Your policy on disinformation cannot be ‘only delete if we don’t think the poster is genuine’. Because that is allowing disinformation to stand and spread.

disinformation on social media is not always intended to cause direct harm; rather, it often functions as a tool for shaping perceptions, influencing behavior, and driving engagement etc

TheTeasmaid · 26/08/2025 11:44

SpryUmberPoet · 26/08/2025 11:11

There is a user currently spamming mulyiple threads on the CITME board with a Facebook video on how the 7th October attacks were an inside job. I tried reporting them but mumsnet do not see a problem with it.

I have spoken to multiple Jewish mothers who used to find mumsnet a helpful resource, but have left because if the antisemitism that has been allowed to fester over the past couple of years. There are comments that would have been immediately deleted two or three years ago but that are now allowed to stand. Things that aren't even dogwhistly but blatant.

false flag military operations have been proven in history hench why some presume

SquishedMallow · 26/08/2025 11:52

BeckyAMumsnet · 26/08/2025 09:28

Thanks for all your comments.

On the substance of what you say, it’s relatively straightforward to moderate posts that are explicitly racist or abusive, and those are removed quickly. Where it gets more complex is in areas such as immigration, national identity, or political debate. Illegal immigration as we are all acutely aware is a leading political issue in the UK right now and is covered widely in mainstream news. People will naturally want to discuss it here, and we don’t believe that shutting down those discussions outright - whatever your views of Reform or other parties - is a productive approach.

We are alert that conversations on these topics can often cross a line. The concept of a “dog whistle” is relevant here as while some people use the term to describe any coded or indirect way of pushing a hostile view, the line between legitimate political debate and language intended to signal prejudice can be subjective. This is why we don’t make snap decisions and take several factors into account, including the broader context of the discussion and the poster’s standing with us. On misinformation/disinformation - we do remove posts where it’s clear something is being used deliberately to mislead or provoke. But not every mistaken or questionable statement meets that threshold. Sometimes it’s simply someone being ill-informed (as mentioned on this thread there have been several instances of disinformation on other platforms that led to people asking those questions on Mumsnet.) In those cases, challenge from other posters, provided it’s civil, is often the best corrective. We also appreciate that posters can feel stuck on this - challenge in too combative a way, and you think it risks breaking our rules. On this point - we do consider context and we are happy to hear from posters who want to discuss a deletion.

On the frequent suggestion that we leave problematic posts standing “for clicks” - we want to be very clear that this is not true. Whether a post generates traffic or not has no bearing on how the moderation team handles it. Our decisions are based on our guidelines and values, not on site metrics. If we feel a post doesn’t align with Mumsnet’s values, it will be removed, regardless of how much traffic it generates.

We know it can be frustrating when our decisions don’t align perfectly with everyone’s expectations and in truth we can never have an approach that will suit everyone. But our principles are clear - racism is not permitted on Mumsnet, nor is disinformation used to cause harm. At the same time, we will not ban discussion of current political issues simply because they are controversial. Our task is to draw that line fairly, and to keep reviewing how we do so. Your feedback is always welcome, and very much helps to inform our approach so please do continue to share your thoughts as we are reading.

Thankyou for a detailed and essentially balanced reply @BeckyAMumsnet

PandoraSocks · 26/08/2025 12:58

PandoraSocks · 26/08/2025 10:01

And here we have a good example of a shiny new thread doing its best to cement the idea that certain asylum seekers ("men of an ethnic minority" as the OP coyly puts it) are all sexual predators, but clothing it in the garb of reasonable concerns. @BeckyAMumsnet These people have an agenda, it is ugly and MN is allowing it to flourish.

www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5398822-to-think-that-men-without-documentation-should-be-processed-off-shore?utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share

www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5398958-why-are-governments-putting-women-and-girls-at-higher-risk-of-sex-crimes

OP of previously deleted thread is trying again. 🙄

FreezeDriedStrawberries · 26/08/2025 13:00

PandoraSocks · 26/08/2025 12:58

www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5398958-why-are-governments-putting-women-and-girls-at-higher-risk-of-sex-crimes

OP of previously deleted thread is trying again. 🙄

Show quote history

It's gone already
Edit - sorry, no it's not, clicked on the other link

genpop · 26/08/2025 13:03

It's still there and apparently doesn't break talk guidelines (although the second post about shooting dinghies did)

FreezeDriedStrawberries · 26/08/2025 13:06

genpop · 26/08/2025 13:03

It's still there and apparently doesn't break talk guidelines (although the second post about shooting dinghies did)

🥲 I never understand comments like that. Are they literally wanting innocent people shot by saying that?
They've either not thought through their comments, or that is indeed what they want 💔
Precisely why dehumanising language and demonising minority groups is so dangerous.

Piggywaspushed · 26/08/2025 13:10

MN has become a laughing stock on Reddit. Actually, they're not laughing.

PandoraSocks · 26/08/2025 13:13

genpop · 26/08/2025 13:03

It's still there and apparently doesn't break talk guidelines (although the second post about shooting dinghies did)

So why was OP's other thread deleted and not this one? Smacks of a lack of joined up moderating. I wonder if communication between mods is an issue?

MNHQ

BeckyAMumsnet · 26/08/2025 13:14

SpryUmberPoet · 26/08/2025 11:11

There is a user currently spamming mulyiple threads on the CITME board with a Facebook video on how the 7th October attacks were an inside job. I tried reporting them but mumsnet do not see a problem with it.

I have spoken to multiple Jewish mothers who used to find mumsnet a helpful resource, but have left because if the antisemitism that has been allowed to fester over the past couple of years. There are comments that would have been immediately deleted two or three years ago but that are now allowed to stand. Things that aren't even dogwhistly but blatant.

These posts were removed shortly after reporting - we're not sure why you'd think otherwise?

Kreepture · 26/08/2025 13:14

The benefit bashing thread is also still standing.

I'm not sure how that fits under @BeckyAMumsnet definition of a genuine thread.

Already got reported/deleted on that thread for calling it what is it.

FreezeDriedStrawberries · 26/08/2025 13:15

PandoraSocks · 26/08/2025 13:13

So why was OP's other thread deleted and not this one? Smacks of a lack of joined up moderating. I wonder if communication between mods is an issue?

Show quote history

I thought TAATs (threads about threads) were banned? If it's been deleted and automatically put up to try again, surely that's a TAAT and not allowed? 😕

PandoraSocks · 26/08/2025 13:26

FreezeDriedStrawberries · 26/08/2025 13:15

I thought TAATs (threads about threads) were banned? If it's been deleted and automatically put up to try again, surely that's a TAAT and not allowed? 😕

Show quote history

OP has approached from a different angle, tbf, but aim is the same. To whip up hatred against asylum seekers.

MyNameIsX · 26/08/2025 14:24

I think the truth is more prosaic.

Some might suggest that certain of the more ‘entitled’ posters, believe they can operate MN as their own personal fiefdom - instructing others what to say, and how to think.

MNHQ are doing a very good job in difficult circumstances.

KateMiskin · 26/08/2025 15:16

Thanks everyone for expressing my thoughts more eloquently than I could.

I do think MN needs a different policy as there is clearly a sustained disinformation campaign, as many have pointed out.