Friday, October 16. 2009Jan Moir, the Web, Free Speech and the Wisdom of MobsComments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
agree with you. didn't even know who she was until today. Read the article to see what the fuss was about, didn't particularly like it, but she has the right to say what she believes, and people have the right to disagree with her. The baying mob scared me from saying this on twitter in case they turned on me. I have never EVER been afraid of saying what I think. But I was today. And I can see a lot more of this behavior happening at election time... as you say, its scary.
Perhaps it's just who I follow, but I've found most people referring to the Charlie Brooker piece (well researched and well put), then the PCC. Thanks for the Daily Quail ref, by the way. Loved it. It's a mob with intelligent, articulate leaders. And at the tail end are the people with the same level of level-headedness and intellectual curiosity that Jan Moir was appealing to in her article. If there weren't a lot of them about, she wouldn't have an audience. I don't think she should be too surprised or offended by what she's spawned. And if Russell Brand had to go, (not that I think he did, necessarily, but hey, I'm not a fawning high-up in the BBC), it's not too much of a leap to wonder if she should stay. I'd stay it started well with Trafigura and it's still on a positive trend. Twitter can be a force for good. But yes, I wish I hadn't read that four-letter word quite so often in the comments.
Moir can express her opinion. However, it is her poor journalism that I find offensive. She has constructed a fantasy with no evidence to support her prejudice. She is welcome to her opinion, but so are those who question her column. Using her approach I could speculate that being overweight and living in sin will no doubt lead to an early grave. However, that would be sinking to the journalistic level of the Mail.
Definitely, there is a deep irony in the outburst that some have chosen to make in response to the original piece. It accentuates the isolated places in which it is possible to find impartial journalism rather than sensationalism seeking profit. Freedom of speech should allow all voices to be heard, even if it is unpalatable at times. (For the record I do not agree with Jan Moir's view.)
Apparently 100% of all people who have lived pure, blameless lives have died eventually
![]()
Jan Moir absolutely has a right to say what she wishes. But I'm with Ian Burrell in regard to her assumptive, ill-informed, bigoted journalism being offensive. It's as if some agrophobic housewife has been let loose with her uneducated fears after spending weeks refusing to pull back the curtains on real life. It is so ill-informed that it beggars belief. Has she not heard of sudden adult death syndrome? Has she not heard of heterosexuals bringing third parties back to their own place for more drinks. That a columnist can believe let alone write such bile makes one weep for journalistic standards. Then again, she was a restaurant critic beforehand (hardly Casandra) The private events preceding Stephen's death bear no reflection on the tragedy that followed. This is a classic example of New Media v old media. One lone columnist put her ignorance out there to be judged. And Jan Moir is now feeling the judgement of social media..perhaps as irrational as her own piece was to thousands. Sounds like a healthy democracy to me. Ignorance has spoken - and so have the people (mob or otherwise)
Yes, but adult heterosexuals maneage -a trois play Canasta. Or Bridge if its quattre. More that that and they play Poker ...ooops
![]()
Freedom of speech should be left to the orange box preachers on Hyde Park Corner where their 15 minutes of fame goes in one ear and out of the other. Unlike Moir's race for effect, in type, for everyone to read, read and read again; just to make sure they read it right in the first place.
I say let the guy go cold before the stench of judgement comes running like a rat up a drain pipe.
Wait a second you are saying two opposing things here: 1. Protect complete freedom of speech 2. She should have been going with the ipcc guidlines. Sure she has the right to THINK what she likes but we shouldn't have to hear about it. This article makes me suspicious. If you are unintentionally putting two opposing points across then I still really don't like people trying to make their name off by promoting a backlash which fixates on the behaviour of a few. If you are not, then I believe you are intentionally trying to muddy the issue to serve some agenda which benefits people like Jan Moir.
I don't happen to agree that free speech should extend to sexuality/gender/race-hate speech, which is what I believe Jan Moir was doing. For example: When someone on the platform of a station started racially abusing another person I didn't say: 'I defend this person's right to hurl abuse at someone else based on their skin colour, I don't happen to agree however', I said 'What you're saying is racist, stop saying it right now, because nobody else wants to hear it' and, when asked by the abusee, I reported what I had heard to the police and got her prosecuted for racial abuse. What Jan Moir did isn't any different and I think most people on Twitter think the same thing, and have demonstrated that they are not willing to put up with having to hear abuse like this as it is offensive and wrong. Also, you don't have to be gay to find it so.
Strangely, I haven't noticed the baying lynch mob you refer to. This may be because I wasn't very active on Twitter yesterday, but I saw the links to the original article, links to Charlie Brooker's effective demolition of it in the Grauniad, and links to the IPCC.
I agree with you completely that free speech is important, and worth fighting for; but the response I have seen seems appropriate - and an excellent use of free speech itslef. (I did click on the link to the "Jan Moir" Twitter search, but there were pages of tweets just a couple of minutes old, and I gave up...) I also think we need to allow people we disagree with a voice: I hate what the BNP have to say, and I don't want to hear it, but I think they should be let on Question Time so that their ideas can be shown up for the distortions and lies they really are. Evan Harris MP made a telling comment at February's Convention of Modern Liberty: the real test of human rights is on those we might feel don’t deserve them – criminals, prisoners, terrorists… It was a good – and powerful – point: human rights are universal, and that means everyone, however distasteful we might find their deeds or beliefs. Free speech is one of those rights.
What Patrick said, essentially. Didn't know there was a lynch-mob, just a lot of very unimpressed people (none of whom, AFAIK, were Mail readers).
I get very uneasy when I read emails from politically aware friends urging me to go to anti-BNP demonstrations. Do I agree with the BNP and other fascist groups? Absolutely not. But do I think they have a right to air their views? Of course. Freedom of speech is either a right or it isn't; we can't just let people join the club if they agree with us. If Ms Moir has breached IPCC guidelines then by all means people who are concerned by that should pursue it. But hounding someone until they lose their job is a bit too mob-like for my taste. Having said which, if I were in charge I would be tempted to take off and nuke the Mail and its ilk from orbit. This is exactly why I should never be put in charge.
Patrick,
It depends who you follow, I think I might have to trim my list following the mob might not be good sometimes! you obviously follow people who rise above such things. They were there, and I didn't like to disagree with them. I think your final two paras say it all: 'Evan Harris MP made a telling comment at February's Convention of Modern Liberty: the real test of human rights is on those we might feel don’t deserve them – criminals, prisoners, terrorists… It was a good – and powerful – point: human rights are universal, and that means everyone, however distasteful we might find their deeds or beliefs. Free speech is one of those rights.' Well said. chris. |
QuicksearchMore Broad StuffFor More Information about Broadsight:
Contact us Broadsight website Articles To sign up for Broadstuff on other services: Broadstuff - the Twitter edition Broadstuff - the Jaiku edition Broadstuff - the FriendFeed edition Subscribe to Broadstuff via email Books we are reading: Poll of the WeekWill Augmented reality just be a flash in the pan?
Archives Popular Entries
Categories
Creative Commons LicenceBlog Administration |
So folks, here it is for your Bumper Christmas Holiday Edition- the 10 Best Broadstuff stories of 2009. In its own way its a good log of some of the ZeitGeist in the Digital Ecosystem space. In order of popularity they were: 1. Stuff White People Don't
Tracked: Dec 24, 18:07
Last night David Cameron spoke at the TED event, in London. It was in the stream dealing with Behavioural Psychology and Economics (I covered it here) and his talk was essentially a thesis in how this may be used by a future administration. My notes d
Tracked: Feb 11, 22:45