Labour activists playing games on social media

Ballard

Sapphire wrote: »

Just to add – I find it deeply troubling that hugely powerful and wealthy, and largely hidden, vested interests can undermine democracy in this way, via social media. It is dangerous, not to mention immoral.

I find it more of an issue that Viscount Rothermere (Daily Mail), Rupert Murdoch (Sun) and to a lesser extent due to its fairly poor circulation, Richard Desmond (Express) push their agendas. There are incredibly wealthy men but have the ear of number 10.

IAmWales

Cakeguts wrote: »

Just to say that I have spend quite a lot of time in the last few days trying to get people to remove from social media a photograph of probably the UK's worst sex offender which had been altered to show a political message. I personally didn't care that much about the political message what I minded about was the person in the photograph. I really didn't want any of his victims to see this photograph on social media. Or in fact anyone who was a victim of sex abuse. At least one of the people I contacted refused to delete it. Someone else accused me of not having a sense of humour. What I can't get out of my mind is how anyone thought that this was good photo to use in a political campaign. I even asked the political party on the social media site to do something about it and so far nothing.

I am appalled that anyone could think that putting a photograph of this man on social media would be appropriate. Not only that but also that the Labour Party don't appear to be doing anything about it.

So it looks as if the Labour party don't mind their supporters using the photographs of sex offenders?

There are thousands of pictures of Jimmy Saville on social media and the internet as a whole. Are you trying to get them all removed, or just the one of him wearing a Conservative t shirt?

Yah_Boo_Sux

IAmWales wrote: »

There are thousands of pictures of Jimmy Saville on social media and the internet as a whole. Are you trying to get them all removed, or just the one of him wearing a Conservative t shirt?

Read the post again.
Then your post should perhaps read as "There are thousands of pictures of Jimmy Saville on social media and the internet as a whole. Are you trying to get them all removed, or just the doctored and altered one of him wearing a Conservative t shirt?"
Clear enough now?


Perhaps you would not object to say a Brady-wearing-a-labour-t-shirt example instead?
To say that either are in poor taste is at best a gross understatement.

ruperts

They're all at it with the social media stuff. They've been at it for decades through the mainstream media as well, but naturally the mainstream media aren't going to report on that.

mailmannz

Why is Labour so against people who can afford to pay for their old age care paying for their old age care?

It seems completely sensible that those who can afford it pay themselves which would then have the added bonus of there being more money available for those who need help the most.

Regards

Mailman

BobQ

Fella wrote: »

Of course it's dishonest, they're going onto every local news site & posting the same almost certainly made-up comment. And if you look you'll see it's not always the same username.

Blatant shoddy attempt by Momentum to whip up hatred of the Tories, about on the level of their Virgin Trains stunt. They specialise in this kind of thing.

They are not quotes they are comments. All the time it is possible to use a pseudonym and make comments I fair to see what the problem is with posting similar comments on multiple sites. It is certainly not illegal.

I suspect that all party activists do this.

BobQ

mailmannz wrote: »

Why is Labour so against people who can afford to pay for their old age care paying for their old age care?

It seems completely sensible that those who can afford it pay themselves which would then have the added bonus of there being more money available for those who need help the most.

Regards

Mailman

Nothing wrong with the idea that thosewho can afford to pay should pay. I agree its better that the first £100K is exempt than currently where the first £23K is exempt.

The only question I would ask is whether it is fair that two people each worth £500,000 should be treated so unequally if one of them gets dementia and the other has a heart attack and dies in days.

Would it not be fairer if their contribution to their social care was more equal? If say 10% of all estates above 100K went to fund social care?

That said I like the idea more for the fact that it is the Conservatives who are shafting their core voters.Which is why I do not think the policy will ever actually be introduced.

Cakeguts

IAmWales wrote: »

There are thousands of pictures of Jimmy Saville on social media and the internet as a whole. Are you trying to get them all removed, or just the one of him wearing a Conservative t shirt?

It would be great if we could get them all removed. Why add one?

antrobus

Cakeguts wrote: »

It would be great if we could get them all removed. Why add one?

There's a well known photo of Savile and Blair looking very chummy together.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2487217/Jimmy-Savile-harassed-music-boss-wife-Chequers-dinner-party-hosted-Tony-Blair.html

Although I believe if you look hard enough, you can find photos of Savile with a host of people; Charlie boy, the Queen, Heath, Brown.... He was around for some time.

BobQ

Sapphire wrote: »

Just to add – I find it deeply troubling that hugely powerful and wealthy, and largely hidden, vested interests can undermine democracy in this way, via social media. It is dangerous, not to mention immoral.

Which powerful and wealthy people do you think are covertly supporting Labour. They have 3-4m subscription paying supporters, that is where their power comes from.