Tag Archives: online

How will an ‘Online Harms’ law help if judges won’t recognise the tactics?

Kate Winslet: accepting her BAFTA for I Am Ruth, she pleaded for legislation to tackle the online abuses to which young people are subjected. But what good will any law do, if judges refuse to acknowledge the methods of online abuse?

When Kate Winslet won a BAFTA for I Am Ruth, she pleaded for legislation to battle the online harms to which young people are now constantly subjected.

It was a powerful speech, and the panellists on the BBC’s Politics Live on May 15 (Danny Kruger, Shami Chakrabarti, Alastair Campbell and ConservativeHome’s Henry Hill) discussed what could be done. You can hear their salient points here:

https://youtu.be/ectWDks3Y0Q

But is it possible to legislate against the tactics that are used to mentally and emotionally attack young people? Would the courts even recognise such methods if a case reached them?

I don’t think so, based on my experience in Rachel Riley’s libel case against me.

I put forward evidence about several different forms of abuse that are commonly used in the social media but the judge refused to recognise any of them.

That was her prerogative, and I’m sure she had her reasons.

But it sets a precedent that means it may now be much harder for anybody trying to win a case under forthcoming “online harms” laws to succeed.

Actions have consequences. I fear the consequences for young people in this age of anti-social media may be severe.

I will try to make our MPs aware of my concerns. It would be welcome if you would do the same.

In the meantime, I am still trying to raise money to pay my legal team, whose members were also concerned about the effect of online abuse on young people.

Please – and only if you are able to spare it – donate to my CrowdJustice fund, or contribute in any of the following ways:

Make a donation via the CrowdJustice page. Keep donating regularly until you see the total pass the amount I need.

Email your friends, asking them to pledge to the CrowdJustice site.

Post a link to Facebook, asking readers to pledge.

On Twitter, tweet in support, quoting the address of the appeal.

And don’t forget that if you’re having trouble, or simply don’t like donating via CrowdJustice, you can always donate direct to me via the Vox Political PayPal button, where it appears on that website. But please remember to include a message telling me it’s for the crowdfund!

Online harm continues to be an urgent, current issue and my court case was all about that.

It is possible that my actions in defence of a vulnerable teenager may eventually be vindicated, whether a High Court judge approves of them or not.

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Be among the first to know what’s going on! Here are the ways to manage it:

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the right margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

5) Join the uPopulus group at https://upopulus.com/groups/vox-political/

6) Join the MeWe page at https://mewe.com/p-front/voxpolitical

7) Feel free to comment!

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

Is porn allegation MP the best to oversee online safety bill? Really?

Damian Green: he described the claims against him as ‘untrue and deeply hurtful’, when they were made.

Let’s get this straight: the chairman of the committee overseeing the Online Safety Bill has recused himself because of serious sexual assault claims – to be replaced by an MP who lost his cabinet post for having porn on his Parliamentary computers.

Is Damian Green (for it is he) really the best person to see this legislation onto the Statute Book?

He has replaced Julian Knight, who is being investigated by police.

Green lost his Cabinet job in 2017 after breaching the Ministerial Code by making “inaccurate and misleading statements” suggesting he was unaware of indecent material on his parliamentary computer.

In his resignation letter Green said that while he “did not download or view pornography on my parliamentary computers” he “should have been clear in my press statements that police lawyers talked to my lawyers” about it in 2008 and then raised it in a subsequent phone call in 2013.

Wouldn’t it be better if the Culture, Media and Sport committee was chaired by somebody who didn’t have any allegations of dodgy sexual behaviour in their past – either online or in real life?

Source: MP sacked over porn allegations to oversee online safety bill

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

Here’s the reason nobody is stopping online scammers

This is revealing from Money Saving Expert Martin Lewis – who came out with a naughty word in a Parliamentary committee while discussing online scammers.

It seems the government won’t legislate to stop online scammers because it’s too complicated – but the firms running the big internet platforms can’t be bothered unless it’s worth their while; the cost of being sued for failing to do it is less than the profit from the advertising revenue they get from the crooks.

See for yourself:

And why not employ people to stop the scammers, rather than rely on a tech solution? The tech companies are the biggest and most profitable, so they can afford to do it.

They just need an incentive. If they won’t take the carrot, maybe it’s time for the stick.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

Online Safety Bill is watered-down – but should it really legislate for ‘hurt feelings’?

Social media demon: it seems the new Online Safety Bill won’t protect anybody from abusive other users. So what good will it do?

Parts of a planned law to protect people using the Internet from seeing illegal material have been watered down – to protect free speech, it seems.

The government has removed a section of the Online Safety Bill that refers to “legal but harmful material”.

This means the largest, high-risk online platforms like Facebook, Instagram and YouTube, that would have been tasked with preventing adults from being exposed to content like self-harm, eating disorder and misogynistic posts will no longer have to.

Children will still be protected from such material, if the Bill is passed into law as planned before Parliament dissolves for the summer recess next year.

The change has been prompted by critics like Tory Kemi Badenoch who said the section on legal but harmful material was “legislating for hurt feelings” by demanding a crackdown on free speech.

In July, nine senior Conservatives, including former ministers Lord Frost, David Davis and Steve Baker, who has since returned to the government, wrote a letter to then Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries, saying provision could be used to clamp down on free speech by a future Labour government.

Mr Davis has gone on to urge the government to axe other measures that could “undermine end-to-end encryption” that he said we all rely on to keep safe online.

He said measures permitting the government to direct firms to use technology to examine private messages were a threat to privacy and freedom of expression.

Culture Secretary Michelle Donelan said the revised Bill still offers “a triple shield of protection – so it’s certainly not weaker in any sense”.

This requires platforms to:

remove illegal content
remove material that violates their terms and conditions
give users controls to help them avoid seeing certain types of content to be specified by the bill

This could include content promoting eating disorders or inciting hate on the basis of race, ethnicity, sexual orientation or gender reassignment- although there will be exemptions to allow legitimate debate.

But Labour’s Lucy Powell said removing obligations over “legal but harmful” material gives a “free pass to abusers and takes the public for a ride”.

This Writer tends to agree – to a certain extent.

It seems the changes mean users would be able to control what they see, rather than tech companies being given active duties to tackle “bad actors and dangerous content”.

So – it seems to me – abusers will still have carte blanche to use social media platforms to attack anybody they like, with the onus on the abused to put measures in place to stop themselves seeing such material.

Won’t that mean other users – on platforms like Twitter, for example – will still be able to see the abusive material and form their own conclusions about the people for whom it is intended?

The problem is partially that the UK’s legal system simply doesn’t understand how online abuse works. I tried to explain it to a High Court judge in July but her recent judgment shows that my words flew over her head.

Either she did not understand how abusive techniques are employed on social media platforms, or she didn’t care. That’s how it seemed to me.

We need legislation to prevent online abuse and harassment by criminalising the abusers – or we risk huge harm, both psychological and physical – being inflicted on our children, in spite of what this Bill pretends to be.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

Is it time for governments to guard against the collapse of social media – and other online – firms?

The takeover of Twitter by Elon Musk has created a huge upheaval in the corporation, with many financial supporters and users either leaving it or planning to do so.

There are widespread fears that it may collapse.

Other large firms, that similarly dominate our online lives, are at similar risk of takeover and destruction – calamities that would threaten our current way of life.

What is to be done about it?

I copy below a thread by economist Richard Murphy, who believes that governments should act to create similar systems that are publicly funded and free from commercial interference.

Before you read that, consider this: way back in 2020, I published an article quoting an Australian (I think) magazine that said the UK’s mass media had been complicit in lying to the nation about the Boris Johnson government’s efforts to deal with Covid-19.

It stated that the only people questioning the then-government’s behaviour were independent, social media sites (like Vox Political) and called for them to be supported.

Instead, social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter have squeezed us hard. This Site’s Facebook page has more than 42,000 followers – but only around 350 ever get to see any single post.

I am shown adverts calling for me to spend £14 to send them to a couple of hundred more readers, but there is no guarantee that they are followers of the page, or even interested in UK politics at all.

On Twitter, I have more than 10,000 followers currently – but, again, only a few of them ever see my tweets.

This is clear interference in the performance of my business, that takes advantage of the need to promote my site via the social media.

So my question is this: is it time to set up publicly-funded alternatives to Twitter, Google and so on, simply to re-establish a level playing field for businesses?

Here’s the Richard Murphy thread:

The future of Twitter appears to be in doubt today. Advertisers have pulled out. Musk has slashed staff numbers. A nasty, right-wing dominated hate-fest may follow, although I hope not. But what if other critical media institutions went the same way? What then? A quick thread…

— Richard Murphy (@RichardJMurphy) November 5, 2022

I don’t see how many good voices that have been heard as a result of Twitter would have got noticed without it. I would deeply miss the almost instant news on politics that it provides because most opinion I want to hear is on this site.

— Richard Murphy (@RichardJMurphy) November 5, 2022

But I’d encourage that for a reason much more important. Twitter has, overall, been a good thing in many people’s lives (but not everyone’s, and we could all do without the hate). But lot’s not pretend it’s critical.

— Richard Murphy (@RichardJMurphy) November 5, 2022

Or Google. And I do not just mean the search engine. It’s communication tools are vital to the functioning of vast numbers of organisations, from my university onwards. Microsoft plays the same role in other places.

— Richard Murphy (@RichardJMurphy) November 5, 2022

They are, admittedly, more mature organisations than Twitter. But in the event of someone with a massive ego and a strong political agenda antagonistic to the state staged a hostile takeover attack on them, backed by big money, would they stay independent?

— Richard Murphy (@RichardJMurphy) November 5, 2022

So, are any of these other, more critical services immune from being taken over and destroyed? I see no obvious reason to think that they are in any way safe from such attack. And that leaves society massively vulnerable to these companies.

— Richard Murphy (@RichardJMurphy) November 5, 2022

Musk and Twitter provide a real warning. We are deeply vulnerable to relatively few tach companies, and we can rely on none of them. My question is, what is society going to do to protect itself against the madness of this situation?

— Richard Murphy (@RichardJMurphy) November 5, 2022

I’d rate the risk of that failure as quite high right now. We really do need to take action, and very soon. The world would fall apart without some of these companies now. It’s too big a risk to not plan for their failure.

— Richard Murphy (@RichardJMurphy) November 5, 2022

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

Celebrities sue Daily Mail publisher for ‘appalling breaches of privacy’

I spotted this on a BBC News tickertape last night (October 6) but couldn’t find the story.

Fortunately I have now discovered this Twitter thread which lays it all out:

Prince Harry, Sir Elton John, David Furnish, Elizabeth Hurley, Sadie Frost and Baroness Doreen Lawrence have launched a legal action against Associated Newspapers, publishers of The Daily Mail, The Mail on Sunday and the Mail Online.

— Daniel Sandford (@BBCDanielS) October 6, 2022

Hamlins LLP said the "unlawful acts alleged to have taken place include:
1) The hiring of private investigators to secretly place listening devices inside people’s cars and homes

— Daniel Sandford (@BBCDanielS) October 6, 2022

4) The impersonation of individuals to obtain medical information from private hospitals, clinics, and treatment centres by deception
5) The accessing of bank accounts, credit histories and financial transactions through illicit means and manipulation.

— Daniel Sandford (@BBCDanielS) October 6, 2022

"These unsubstantiated and highly defamatory claims – based on no credible evidence – appear to be simply a fishing expedition by claimants and their lawyers, some of whom have already pursued cases elsewhere."

— Daniel Sandford (@BBCDanielS) October 6, 2022

The newspaper company’s representatives can say what they like, but members of the public already have an opinion about this:

This lawsuit against Daily Mail is exactly what this country needs.

I really hope this is only the beginning.

— Taru (@tarzan_uk) October 6, 2022

R.e. the Daily Mail lawsuit: if the DM was wiped from the face of the planet, and everyone who worked for or enabled it was banished to the sewers, it would be an unambiguous win for the UK

— Metaphorical Skeleton (@KrimsonMist) October 7, 2022

I hope the new lawsuit against the Daily Mail bankrupts the newspaper, just like what happened to News of the World.

In the meantime though a how-to-guide on how to read The Daily Mail whilst it's available… pic.twitter.com/bYwonax34U

— Ripp Hanna (@Rpphanna) October 6, 2022

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

Why is Rishi Sunak trying to make the cost of living crisis WORSE?

Online shopper: well, no. He was actually taking part in an online question and answer session. But it’s reasonable to expect Rishi Sunak to do SOME shopping on the Internet, isn’t it?

There’s a lack of joined-up thinking here.

Rishi Sunak has been trying to float the idea of a tax on online retailers, to fund a cut in business rates for High Street businesses.

But those very firms have contacted that Chancellor to point out that such a tax would hit them as well – they have websites too.

In a letter to Sunak, dated May 27, the companies and industry groups involved stated: “We believe an OST would… hurt – not help – the high street, and stifle retail innovation and investment.

“The burden of business rates on retail is too high and needs reforming, but an additional tax on a sector that is already overtaxed is not the answer.

“Retailers would have little choice but to pass on an OST to consumers in the form of higher prices thereby fuelling inflation,” they state. The burden “is likely to fall heaviest” on groups including “people on lower incomes”.

Perhaps This Writer is missing the point, but wouldn’t it be logical to use the tax system in order to achieve the required effect?

So perhaps a reduction in business rates paid by firms that have physical shops, in tandem with the introduction of a levy on online retailers would hit the right spot?

The problem here is that Sunak is not intelligent enough to find a nuanced way forward.

Asking him to find answers to these problems is like asking a surgeon to operate while wearing boxing gloves.

Source: Rishi Sunak’s online sales tax will hurt the high street, retailers warn

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

Grade confirmed as Ofcom chair despite MPs’ warning about lack of knowledge

Not ideal: Lord Michael Grade’s understanding of the social media comes from his own children – he doesn’t use it himself. And remember, this is a man who failed to realise Jimmy Savile was committing many terrible crimes, while an executive at the BBC.

Former BBC chair and Channel 4 boss Lord Michael Grade has been confirmed as the new chair of Ofcom, despite apparent glaring gaps in his knowledge of the social media and online safety.

This is important because Ofcom will be responsible for policing online safety after the new Bill on that subject becomes law.

The Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport said Grade had been appointed by the culture secretary, Nadine Dorries, to the £142,500-a-year role for four years from 1 May.

This was despite concerns raised by the Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee that it was concerned by Lord Grade’s admission this week that he does not use social media but is aware of how it works thanks to his children:

“His clear lack of depth when talking about social media and online safety gives us concerns,” said the committee in a report published on Friday, hours before the government confirmed his appointment.

“He appears to understand the importance of Ofcom’s new role in regulating the online space. It would be difficult to find a candidate with deep experience across the whole of Ofcom’s remit, and we hope that he will be well supported with the necessary advice to fulfil his role as chair.”

The committee, which did not have the power to block Grade’s appointment, was scathing about the DCMS hiring process… Conservative chair Julian Knight said: “This shambles of a process gives us great concern about the department’s ability to run effective and impartial public appointment competitions.”

In a statement issued after Grade’s confirmation, Knight said the rapid appointment of Grade and that of Orlando Fraser as chair of the Charity Commission on Friday showed the appointments process was “broken”. “The fact that the DCMS department has taken only a matter of hours to put aside our concerns highlights once again that there are serious underlying issues at play here,” he said.

The concerns about Grade’s ability to tackle online safety may be well-founded.

Bear in mind this comment on his appointment, from a reader on Facebook:

“What, the guy who let [Jimmy] Savile run riot when running [the] BBC? *That* Michael Grade?

Source: Michael Grade confirmed as Ofcom chair despite MPs’ warning | Ofcom | The Guardian

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

Have you experienced – and reported – #onlineabuse? If so, the #VictimsCommissioner wants your views

Online abuse: have you been a victim? If so, take part in the survey before the Online Harms Bill is passed into law.

The Victims Commissioner for England and Wales has launched a survey of online abuse, in advance of the Tory government’s new Online Safety legislation.

The Commissioner, Dame Vera Baird, acts independently of the Ministry of Justice, the Home Office, the police, the Crown Prosecution Service and the courts to champion the rights of victims (as a group; she is not able to represent individuals) and make sure they are treated fairly and correctly by the criminal justice system.

She has issued the following appeal for information:

“You may be aware that the government is currently introducing a bill before parliament on online harms; the Online Safety Bill.

“The Victims’ Commissioner for England and Wales would like to hear about your experience of online abuse and, if relevant, your experience of reporting this abuse.

“We would also like to hear from you if you did not report the abuse, and the reasons for this decision.

“We will analyse the information you provide and publish a report on it, which we hope will add victims’ voices to the debate.

“We would like to hear from anyone who has experienced the following types of abuse, in particular: intimate image abuse, online harassment and stalking, coercive behaviour, cyberbullying and trolling and any form of online hate.

“You will be anonymous (not able to be identified) in our reporting, whether or not you choose to give us your contact details at the end of this set of questions.

“We are keen to hear from everyone who wants to complete this survey, including parents or carers of children who have been a victim.

“If you support someone who has been a victim who would like to respond but can’t do so because of language, age, lack of internet access or other barrier, you are welcome to fill in the survey with them (or in the case of children, for them). Alternatively, you can contact us at [email protected] if you would like to request the survey in a different format. At the end of the survey we ask a question about these barriers. Your answers will help us improve future surveys.

“We will be publishing the findings. The survey is anonymous, but at the end we ask if you would be willing to give an email address to be contacted for future research by the Victims’ Commissioner e.g. an interview.

“If you have any questions, please get in touch: [email protected]”

This Writer will be getting in touch as I’ve had a huge amount of abuse and the response when I’ve reported it has been rubbish. How about you?

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

Patel lies about David Amess as she demands removal of social media anonymity

Hate: it was naked on Priti Patel’s face during her Tory conference speech, yet she talks about closing anonymous social media accounts to end it. She speaks with a forked tongue.

The hypocrisy is bald and blatant:

The government is considering removing anonymity from social media accounts, said a source who asked not to be named

— David__Osland (@David__Osland) October 18, 2021

In fact, we know who wants to remove social media anonymity – it’s Priti Patel. But government sources of stories to news media would keep their anonymity, meaning huge opportunities to mislead the public will still be available to them. Remember the false claim that three Labour MPs were going to defect to the Conservatives during conference season?

Patel made her claim during an interview on Sky News, in response to the stabbing of David Amess.

She said there had been a “coarsening” of the public debate (without acknowledging the role that recent Tory governments have played in it) and added:

We can’t carry on like this. I spend too much time with communities who have been under attack, basically who have had all sorts of postings online and it is a struggle to get those posts taken down.

We want to make some big changes on that.

And she said:

This is about wider public discourse and I would also go as far to say social media, anonymity on social media, where we’re members of parliament are subjects of some of the most cruel comments attacks.

And they are relentless, many of them are relentless.

My colleagues go through just some of the most appalling attacks I’ve seen online and I have as well.

Off the top of my head, This Writer doesn’t recall Patel ever showing any concern about the enormous volume of hate sent to Diane Abbott on a regular basis. But then, Ms Abbott is a black female Labour MP and not a white male Tory knight – so it seems other rules apply.

And there’s an elephant in this room. Why is Patel suggesting a crackdown on anonymous social media accounts when the suspect in the Amess murder, Ali Harbi Ali, has not used one?

The suspect in the David Amiss murder used his own name on his social media accounts.

So why is Priti Patel using the killing as an excuse to attack online anonymity?

She's so depraved that she'll piggyback her pre-existing agenda onto the death of one of her own colleagues!

— Another Angry Voice (@Angry_Voice) October 17, 2021

What has social media anonymity got to do with the murder of an MP?

Nothing.

But there is literally no tragedy the Tories won’t use to gain further control or wealth for themselves.

— Kerry-Anne Mendoza 🏳️‍🌈 (@TheMendozaWoman) October 17, 2021

According to a YouGov poll, a majority of people think there should be curbs on anonymity…

Popular but wrong. This is a tool for oppression and won’t do *anything* to reduce abuse. https://t.co/AUeJ2um7Ph

— Prof Paul Bernal (@PaulbernalUK) October 18, 2021

… and This Writer is not a fan of unmonitored anonymity, having been a victim of online hate myself.

But I would not seek to ban online anonymity. I would suggest that those who wanted to be anonymous registered for it, and if social media platforms received verifiable complaints about their activities – in other words, if they were caught abusing others, that privilege may be removed.

The reason for this should be clear to everybody but if it isn’t, read the following:

Removing social media anonymity concerns me. I have to use a pseudonym, hide my location, because men have threatened to rape me, chop me up and bury me in the woods. The police do nothing until they act on a threat.

My crime?

Being a woman online and talking about politics.

— Super Tanskiii (@supertanskiii) October 18, 2021

We must hold on to our freedom to criticise the government, they’ll use this as another way to avoid scrutiny and use it to their advantage.

They have control of the mainstream media, are taking away our right to protest, social media is one of the few freedoms we have left.

— Super Tanskiii (@supertanskiii) October 18, 2021

And of course removing online anonymity will only increase the imbalance between the privileged and the rest of us:

The truth of the matter is this: many of us here know that it makes no difference if someone is anonymous or not; the bile that can come from those with blue ticks can be just as bad as it is from others.

— James Foster (@JamesEFoster) October 17, 2021

Again: I have certainly been a victim of online abuse organised by people on Twitter with blue ticks next to their name. I am not aware of any instance when that organisation has acted on complaints against these “celebrities”.

So it seems that, rather than acting to end online abuse, Ms Patel is trying to increase the ability of the rich and privileged to cause such abuse, while ending any chance for ordinary people to defend themselves.

And let’s not forget that this is coming from the minister who wants to “turn back the boats” of refugees coming to the UK, exposing children to the possibility of drowning at sea, while granting her employees who cause such deaths immunity from prosecution:

Priti Patel: “We come into public life to be a force for good”

Question – is drowning children in the sea a force for good?#marr

— Political Motivation (🏡) (@Margin4Error) October 17, 2021

Hate – whether online or in real life – has always been a tool of the Tories and Patel’s words stand on their heads. She may say she wants to shut it down but in fact it seems clear that she wants to increase it.

Have YOU donated to my crowdfunding appeal, raising funds to fight false libel claims by TV celebrities who should know better? These court cases cost a lot of money so every penny will help ensure that wealth doesn’t beat justice.

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/mike-sivier-libel-fight/

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Here are four ways to be sure you’re among the first to know what’s going on.

1) Register with us by clicking on ‘Subscribe’ (in the left margin). You can then receive notifications of every new article that is posted here.

2) Follow VP on Twitter @VoxPolitical

3) Like the Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/VoxPolitical/

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

4) You could even make Vox Political your homepage at http://voxpoliticalonline.com

And do share with your family and friends – so they don’t miss out!

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

The Livingstone Presumption is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

Vox Political

politics for the people

Tag Archives: online

Is porn allegation MP the best to oversee online safety bill? Really?

Like this:

Here’s the reason nobody is stopping online scammers

Like this:

Online Safety Bill is watered-down – but should it really legislate for ‘hurt feelings’?

Like this:

Celebrities sue Daily Mail publisher for ‘appalling breaches of privacy’

Like this:

Why is Rishi Sunak trying to make the cost of living crisis WORSE?

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this:

Share this:

Like this: