NSPCC Again

[SunsetBeetch]

"Head of ‘child safety’ at the NSPCC. More parts of a terrible jigsaw now falling into place. Can you see what it is yet? t.co/nJKd5nYt1B "

"Bizarre and concerning response of NSPCC to those worried about the antics of one of its employees maybe not so much a mystery now t.co/N0KNloLCxl "

It’s his lack of self awareness that’s staggering. Particularly when Charities are under scrutiny more than ever.

He's locked the account because he's been given a heads up that he's been noticed. Damage control now, given that he knows how the rubber pup perv was highlighted. He's probably trawling through his tweets to get rid of the most egregious examples. He probably won't be thorough enough, though, because if he's been posting shit like that without a care, he probably doesn't get why it's a problem.

So lesbian, gay and bisexual people are not campaigning legitimately, unless they are also advocating for trans people? What about all the other protected characteristics? How about advocating for all those at exactly the same time, too? Disability, age, race.

What a nonsense argument.

And he obviously knows nothing about it, because of course trans people were welcome to the alliance. One of them even spoke. As long as they uphold the mission statement.

Don't these people realise that by saying three of the initials in the acronym are phobic of the forth, they dismantle their entire argument for acronym inclusion, immediately.

He is aware enough to hide the offending tweets.
Trying to back out of the hole he's been digging.

I wonder why that is.

LinkedIn account shows the gravy train progression from Oxford Uni to Head of Child Safety Online. I wish organisations such as this would seek out and mentor people with experience at a grassroots level rather than faces that fit.

Yes. Not known as the wokeing class for nothing. It appears to have achieved complete third sector capture.

He was at the Home Office too. Headquarters of the woke.

I’m having a mind boggling day today. This latest thing is that it takes a Twitter thread from Sarah Phillimore and a thread on MN FWR to highlight the inappropriateness of the NSPCC’s Head of Child Safety Online’s online practices. I mean, does ANYONE give a fuck any more? Is there anyone at the NSPCC who is responsible for making sure everyone else at the NSPCC isn’t a fucking idiot?

it's probably part of his official remit to let kids have privacy online and to help facilitate that.

I hope not. The last thing kids need is privacy online. Because they need to learn that the internet is intrinsically a public space. It is unsafe to expect privacy online.

Would have been interesting to see who his friends and followers were, that is probably quite a network.

He seems to have a generally sensible position on regulating the Internet, and content monitoring just based on Googling his name - he gets quoted in a lot of articles about it. That one thread where he is against the school monitoring system seems related to it being a very bad monitoring system.

I am not defending this dude, I am highly suspicious of him. Am concerned that focusing on the wrong stuff may make it easier for him to wriggle off the hook.

You can still see some of his tweets in the Google Cache. I tried to find the ones that annoyed people that we don't have screenshots of, to archive them, but it seems to need some keywords or something not just the URL. Can't find the tweet about black, brown trans and neurodivergent youth.

Because they need to learn that the internet is intrinsically a public space.

This is a very good point and one that many, many adults don't seem to understand.

Publicly calling strange women "horny" and making jokes about internet porn on his Twtter should be enough to remove him from his position looking after children's internet safety at the NSPCC.

He doesn't know how to conduct himself and he has some very problematic attitudes. I'm sure with his CV he can find another stellar job.

He doesn't know how to conduct himself and he has some very problematic attitudes

He has revealed himself.
I'm afraid this negates his good work, whether he likes it or not.

Professional conduct is expected in an organisation with statutory powers like the NSPCC.
Somebody should look at his job description.

At the very least - the very least - this is highly unprofessional behaviour from someone who has marked their account with their professional status. He didn't have to do that. He could've tweeted in a purely private capacity and not mentioned where he worked or even gone anonymous. But it seems to me he is using his status at the NSPCC to give more gravitas to his tweets.

I work for a variety of charities but I never ever tweet directly about my work nor even mention it in my bio or tweets. I keep my Twitter account totally separate from my work and it's clearly labelled as a personal account with personal views.

I am deeply concerned about the NSPCC if it allows this kind of behaviour to continue without at the very least a sanction. My partner has run several London Marathons for the NSPCC and I helped him fund raise for them. It seems to me the charity is not centring child safety but the safety and free expression of its workers. I'm wondering if, much like Stonewall, Mermaids and many others, it exists much for itself rather than its client group?

OMG what on earth is happening, on a related note a male relative of mine who works in nspcc did raise concerns about changes to gendering toilets, there is some common sense left. That mans tweets though at the very least someone needs a word.

As he's now protected his tweets someone probably has had a word but that's not enough in my opinion. The NSPCC has to have a very clear social media policy. If you badge your account as working for them, in any capacity, then you must restrict your tweets to purely professional ones. If you want to call a new LGB alliance a hate group then do it privately. It's as simple as that. It's what I'd insist upon if I were head of comms or higher.

MissLewis that may be enough for most roles but for one concerned with safeguarding children the views he holds and expresses, regardless of whether he does so in private or not, are incompatible with his role.

I am convinced that the NSPCC is now not fit for purpose, and will be writing to my MP to ask for an enquiry.

From what I've read, the whole queer theory bullshit when applied to children only really benefits paedophiles.

I am more and more inclined to not let my DDs have any online time without a parent present EVER, even when they're older. I don't care if they're different from their peers - at least they'll be safe from online predators and enablers (and yes, looking at you NSPCC). They use computer programs etc offline so I'm not advocating no electronics, just no unmonitored online activity.

@Birdsfoottrefoil wrote:

that may be enough for most roles but for one concerned with safeguarding children the views he holds and expresses, regardless of whether he does so in private or not, are incompatible with his role.

Agree entirely.

I am convinced that the NSPCC is now not fit for purpose, and will be writing to my MP to ask for an enquiry.

Where is the best place to raise concerns about a charity with statutory power? I think we should be writing to everyone and alerting every journalist with an interest in reporting on child protection.

children aren't given enough privacy by their parents online

This stance from Tony Stower is utterly horrifying. His tweet goes on to say he hasnt yet seen a satisfactory model created, despite getting a lot of pitches

So Tony Stower actively receives and reviews pitches from people who are creating software to enable children to conceal their browsing online . So if they are LGBT they can be actively targeted to a secret online ‘club’ for information and contact with adults other than their parents who are presumably creating and sharing that information with the children.

Fuck.

Where is the best place to raise concerns about a charity with statutory power?

The Charities Commission are the responsible body. But don't hold your breath.

For the record, (and any trawling web bots or journos), we're talking about Tony Stower, Head of Child Safety Online and Innovation at NSPCC

Here is his Linkedin profile

uk.linkedin.com/in/tonystower

Tony Stower's Twitter profile says
Head of Child Safety Online @nspcc. Dad through adoption. One of “them”🌈

What does he mean by one of "them" (his quote marks)? That he's gay? What a bizarre thing to write, if that is the case. And if it's not that, what is he referring to?