Owen. Not getting it or goady? Sometimes it’s hard to tell.

[viques]

Article in the Guardian about why homophobia against straight men needs to be addressed. Apparently straight men are at risk of homophobic abuse if they “violate the boundaries of masculinity”, which according to Owen include, being kind and empathetic and “ by not objectifying women or treating them as equals”. Blimey, that will put the frighteners on the guardian readership even faster than news that quinoa is in short supply.

He also challenges ( if that is the word) “perceptive discrimination” when people are treated unfairly on the grounds that they are ‘perceived’ to have a protected characteristic, he gives as an example Sikh men( not, you notice Sikh women, or even Sikh people) who are abused because they are perceived to be Muslim. Not sure where “perceptive discrimination” leaves women, but am pretty sure it is low down on the pecking order as usual, though also in todays guardian interestingly enough is an article by a transwoman who is apparently astonished at the unwarranted verbal sexual harassment she gets, which apparently didn’t happen at all when she wasn’t a transwoman. Maybe she ought to get together with Owen for support.

Anyway good to know that straight men have such a champion in their midst. I hope they can all breathe a little easier knowing that OJ is on their side. He has done such amazing things for gay and transitioning men after all.

That's okay, I will be delighted to explain.

The Times know exactly which school it is. They haven't named it, in order to protect the anonymity of the children. If Owen Jones really wishes to investigate this, he has access to the same context clues that mean that he could approach possible schools privately and directly.

Has he done that? No. He has not. He has made a tweet on the extremely open platform twitter, where he has 1 million followers, asking to be spoonfed more details about a situation involving children. Let's spell that out. He has invited people with knowledge of the situation to contact him with identifying details. That carries the very real risk that one or more people will reply to his twitter thread with names. Of children. And once those names are out there and screenshot by other followers, memories cannot be wiped.

Now, you may say that you never thought of this. That's irrelevant. You are not a journalist. Owen Jones is, and is supposed to be able to foresee such a risk and to take steps to avoid it.

And Talcum X isn't a journalism and admits that. He is a mere rent a gob.

Well said, Purgatory. Despite calling himself a journalist, OJ doesn't seem to understand the very basic principle that there are good reasons for not disclosing identifying information. No doubt if he'd been alive to read Berstein and Woodward's Watergate investigation, he'd have been dismissing it on the basis that they didn't name their source.

Using Twitter to try to identify the school and speak to the students involved is such a flagrant breach of journalistic ethics that it's breathtaking.

He did not.

Here is what Owen Jones said about the incident of the person at Wi-Spa. Let us remember that there was a nine-year-old girl in that hot tub. Since then, a convicted thief and serial sexual offender has been charged with indecent exposure, in connection with the incident.

Anti-trans activists and the far right are openly converging - as this brilliant @GuardianUS report on a campaign of lies over a LA spa underlines.

Lois, one of the reporters, was assaulted while covering anti-trans protests.

A crucial wake up call over this growing menace.

Owen Jones on twitter

IIRC, five complainants went to the police, and Owen called it a "campaign of lies". A nine year old girl and her mother and three other women, but sure, it's a campaign of lies. The only woman to come forward publicly was dragged through the mud online, and goodness knows what she had to withstand in real life, and all whipped up by media.

And just to point out: the Guardian recently appointed an independent investigator to look into its journalists' social media behaviour, and it concluded that OJ had been intimidating and harassing fellow journalists on his own paper. The Guardian will, presumably, have given OJ a warning as a result. What OJ has done is not just breach journalistic ethics but stick two fingers up to the Guardian editor. He must be convinced he's untouchable.

IIRC, five complainants went to the police, and Owen called it a "campaign of lies". A nine year old girl and her mother and three other women, but sure, it's a campaign of lies.

He was demonstrably wrong about a woman who was the victim of a sex crime, and not only did he not want to hear "both sides" he has never acknowledged that he was wrong.

Did anyone ever find that statement that the Guardian was supposed to have released, regarding the workplace harassment? I know Owen posted a screenshot of the (poorly punctuated) draft before the Easter weekend, on twitter and facebook, but did the full version come out?

Xpost. The reason I think it's important to remember that OJ does not consider himself a journalist is that it means he doesn't have to adhere to NUJ standards.

He's flouted several of the guidelines in this shitty tweet alone

www.nuj.org.uk/about-us/rules-and-guidance/code-of-conduct.html

Did anyone ever find that statement that the Guardian was supposed to have released, regarding the workplace harassment? I know Owen posted a screenshot of the (poorly punctuated) draft before the Easter weekend, on twitter and facebook, but did the full version come out?

I've never seen anything, just the screenshot.

And can I just point out that an MP has just been arrested on suspicion of rape, but has not been named. I don't see OJ casting doubt on the veracity of that story. The principle of anonymity is observed, for good reason, in all sorts of sensitive stories.

He's duplicated all these twitter posts on facebook, where he also has lots of followers. I saw a conversation between people in the replies, asking each other to publicly post the name of the school, so they could research the matter for Owen! I repeat, such conversations are wholly predictable results of his call for information. Fortunately, so far no-one has known, or they have been responsible enough not to answer.

Anyway.

Owen Jones' self-descriptions: a brief timeline

April 2018 - Polemicist

In reply to a journalist who tells him "[w]e have different ways of doing journalism, that’s for sure" in an ongoing argument about the quality of Owen's journalism, Owen pointedly refers to himself as a polemicist instead of a journalist.

I'm a polemicist and activist who's open about my political views. I got a platform because I wrote a book about class which people wanted to read. I accept you don't think my platform is useful but I use it as best I can to promote otherwise marginalised issues and causes.

April 2018

October 2021 - columnist

The same people who dismissed anyone mentioning the daily relentless media monstering Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership faced as a factor in his defeat are now claiming that me, a single newspaper columnist, will single handedly make the Tories win again by criticising Keir Starmer

October 2021

April 2022 - independent journalist

you want me to stay silent about these utterly disgusting political positions for partisan reasons, and well, I'm an independent journalist, I will call bullshit out when I see it without fear or favour, and if you and other Starmer cheerleaders don't like that, then sorry, tough

April 2022

Yesterday, May 2022 - journalist

Hi! Columnists are journalists and in 11 years of working in the media I have never compromised anyone’s anonymity, try again!

May 2022

He's duplicated all these twitter posts on facebook, where he also has lots of followers. I saw a conversation between people in the replies, asking each other to publicly post the name of the school, so they could research the matter for Owen! I repeat, such conversations are wholly predictable results of his call for information. Fortunately, so far no-one has known, or they have been responsible enough not to answer.

That's scary. It's so irresponsible. Why can't he see it?

Ah, as I'm blocked and have been for years @PurgatoryOfPotholes, I didn't know that he's changed his self description.

Is he a member of the the NUJ? Because it seems pretty clear thar he's broken several of their Cod of Conduct principles:

1	Does her/his utmost to correct harmful inaccuracies.
2	Differentiates between fact and opinion.
3	Obtains material by honest, straightforward and open means, with the exception of investigations that are both overwhelmingly in the public interest and which involve evidence that cannot be obtained by straightforward means.
4	Does nothing to intrude into anybody’s private life, grief or distress unless justified by overriding consideration of the public interest.

And that bit about his Facebook is bloody shocking.

IANAJ but I would have thought that there are easier, considerably more ethical ways of finding out the details of a story than asking teenage girls to directly contact a grown man through PM.

I would have also assumed that if journalists have concerns about the veracity of a story, that they would do some investigations to find out and then post their findings, rather than what OJ has done. It would avoid a rather humiliating, public climb down if it does prove correct.

Clymene, I think his media identity is fluid, depending on who he's arguing with. People on twitter kept commenting that he wasn't a journalist, and saying that it explained the grossly irresponsible request for identifying information about minors, on a public platform. That goaded him into saying he was a journalist.

Next week, who knows!

I bet if he tried really really hard <as in a quick phone call or two> he could discretely find out who the Peer was and have a discrete chat with her to get background on the talk and her interaction with the girl. He might even be able to connect with the school that way, although as he’ll know full well, they won’t be able to comment.

That approach wouldn’t allow him to crow all over Twitter though and do a big performative show of how much he cares.

He's duplicated all these twitter posts on facebook, where he also has lots of followers. I saw a conversation between people in the replies, asking each other to publicly post the name of the school, so they could research the matter for Owen! I repeat, such conversations are wholly predictable results of his call for information.

The man disgusts me.

Discrimination can be based on perceived characteristics- ie olive skinned women can be abused or discriminated against for being Pakistani even if that’s not their background. That’s the law - it’s the conduct of the discriminator that’s the issue and the harm. Whether or not the person they are abusing is actually Pakistani/ gay/ Muslim / etc is irrelevant.

misogyny is still hatred of women and homophobia is discrimination against gay people. Just because people may perceive others to be women or gay doesn’t mean it’s discrimination or hate towards men or straight people. It just means that the discriminator has made a mistake.

100% agree that on is a vile bully. What normal man tries to start a campaign against a school girl?

Oj not on

The OJ reach out for information is upfront bullying. He's basically said on a public platform that he doesn't believe the girl in question and is seeking information to discredit her.

So LOJ has blocked me on Twitter overnight. I only ever tweet and retweet for and about work-related topics, so this must because of a tweet that I merely liked. Liked, ffs.

What an absolute melt this middle-aged you-tuber is.

OJ has always been a columnist which is very different from a news reporter or journalist or investigative journalist. If he is a card-carrying member of the NUJ, everything he has done is against their code of conduct and we can report him for it.
He is setting himself up as the arbiter of any article that mentions girls, women and/or trans issues. It's a ridiculous position. You do not give bullies a platform. You do not try to out an anonymous source. It's journalism 101.
He is trying to do both. Whilst making life unbearable for a teenage. He is utterly reprehensible.
The Guardian needs to sack him. Yy that will make him a martyr for idiots and bullies everywhere but it will take away some of his implied legitimacy.

It's not a protected title, is it? I mean, he can call himself a journalist on twitter without being an NUJ member, can't he?

For the record, if Owen blocks you on twitter, you can keep up with the Jones on fb. He usually duplicates his opening tweets on FB, so he can reach as wide an audience as possible.