Enjoy your next Cabinet meeting, Ollie. And don't forget to ask the Prime Minister if he still defends the fans' right to boo taking the knee.
What do you think the solution is with social media companies? What protest or action would be effective?
We need to find a solution within society, social media just reflect the worst of that. They are not the cause.
It’s not the social media companies fault, but they give a platform to the dickheads. Put up something that incorporates copyrighted material and it’ll be removed almost instantly, so they can police the content posted on their sites.
It is their fault - they host it and choose not to remove it. They only care about money and aren't bothered about racism.
They are culpable of providing a largely uncensored platform for hate speech - they are not responsible for racism,
They censor things when they choose - they choose to leave it up there. They provide the platform to promote views so have to take some responsibility.
I don't understand why footballers are on social media, as they know that if there's a bad result they will get slaughtered, whether racially or otherwise, as sadly those people are out there and probably always have been, but they now have an anonymous forum to peddle their hatred.
Partially they are on social media to keep in touch with their true fans, but also in the modern world success is also measured by your number of followers, something which makes you more marketable to advertisers. Given the choice, I'd sacrifice some of this commercial income, and stay off.
Probably because they feel they shouldn't be kept from using a service they want to use by abusive arseholes. It's up to the social media companies to be held accountable for the content they allow on their sites, not for Twitter to become a haven for racists because they've bullied all the people they don't like out of it. I know that's an ideal world where SM companies actually give a damn, but I don't think I'd want to be chased off something I want to use by dickheads
It is generally the nature of things that when a footballer (and a multi-millionaire one at that!) misses a penalty in a huge match of national importance, he gets stick for it...Messrs Waddle, Pearce, Southgate et al can certainly vouch for that.
The rather modern idea that we cannot possibly direct any stick at a player because he is a) too young b) black c) had a great tournament ... seems a bit potty to me.
There is certainly a good argument that Sir Gareth ballsed up in subbing Henderson and Trippier and Walker (seasoned pros all having vast experience in the highest pressure games and consummate penalty takers) and bringing on Rashford and Sancho with 20 seconds of extra time to play and then expecting effectively a sixth former to score the decisive penalty in the biggest game this country has played in 55 years!! but it still doesn't get away from the fact that giving stick to a millionaire footballer for missing a penalty is not such a bad thing. Let us not forget how Pearce responded to HIS stick. He responded with impeccable professionalism by scoring in the next penalty shootout and his punch in the air was that defiant punch in the air we all do when we work really hard to redeem ourselves, right a wrong, and persevere to the next level.
I fear that if we outlaw giving millionaire footballers stick (after all, we don't outlaw stick given to the lads down the local park!) then we rob them of their greatest victory - the victory of self improvement of fighting to get things right and for self mastery.
Give them all some stick. It is just what they need if we are going to get to the next level in Qatar in November 2022
Massive overreaction Bob surely?
I mean the post is terrible but unless I'm reading it wrong, isn't the poster just trying to say you cannot criticise him (as a black man) in case it comes across as racist? I mean I don't agree but it's not worthy of your response.
Enjoy your next Cabinet meeting, Ollie. And don't forget to ask the Prime Minister if he still defends the fans' right to boo taking the knee.
What do you think the solution is with social media companies? What protest or action would be effective?
I wouldn't look to the platform as being the cause of the hate. And so, I wouldn't single out social media companies and attempt to fine them ten percent of their global revenues (which would never work) when some of their users abuse people.
If someone calls you on the phone and rants at you with foul, racist, anti-semitic, homophobic, transphobic, islamophobic or other abuse; and others also do so, you would (I hope) report that abuse to the police. I would expect the force then to go after those individuals. I wouldn't expect them to sue Apple or Samsung, or whoever makes your phone.
The vile perpetrators of online, racist - and other - abuse deserve to be punished; not the massive majority of people who go about using social media innocently and profitably (both in financially and in terms of personal development). Trying to fine Twitter ten percent of its global revenue would result in Twitter shutting down in the UK, rather than ponying up the dough. Then who wins?
The problem lies within the people who hold racist views; and the problem is exacerbated when those views are given succour. And that is provided by people from the widest-range of political viewpoint. Corbyn. Farage. Johnson. Patel. People look up to these politicians and see them encouraging, condoning or even joining in with their views. When the Prime Minister's spokesperson was asked, specifically, about taking the knee and the reaction to the England team doing so, the response was not, 'I fully support any action which demonstrates the urgent need to ensure football fans in England grow up to respect everyone who makes up this great country'. It was that he 'fully respects the right of those who choose to peacefully protest and make their feelings known'.
Well, John Q Racist of Hateville, Englandshire really knows what's ok now, doesn't he? He can tweet whatever he likes, because his Prime Minister 'fully respects' him and his peaceful protest against footballers who have deliberately chosen to be black, in order to offend his sensibilities.
You ask what protest would be effective? I believe what would really be effective is not a protest against social media or against the government. It should be a protest by the government and by social media.
The government and political leaders from all parties should protest against racists. Make it absolutely clear that their abhorrent behaviour is not just illegal, but it's deranged. Racism is a nasty, pervasive taint on an otherwise brilliant country. And Boris Johnson should make the very difficult decision to stand on a platform with politicians he is utterly opposed to, in order to stand together to face it down.
Social media companies should act further. They should not ban social media users who transgress, but should use the data they hold on them, against them. Even 'anonymous' accounts leave breadcrumb trails. Perpetrators of racism shouldn't be banned, they should be highlighted. To their friends, families, police, employers, sporting affiliations. The racist who will lose his job for tweeting racism, won't tweet racism. The racist who posts racism on facebook and thereby be banned by his football club, won't post racism.
And governments should support this use of data from social media companies where it fall foul of (current) laws.
Of course doing something effective is difficult, costly and time consuming. And it's always far, far easier to chuck red meat to your base and point a deflecting finger 'over there'.
A Cabinet minister saying the action his government (and all leaders of many other parties, from left to right) is helping to foment will be solved by fining social media companies - because they are the enemy - is the biggest imaginable deflection. And it's an astonishing irony that the Cabinet minister has chosen to do so on social media.
It is generally the nature of things that when a footballer (and a multi-millionaire one at that!) misses a penalty in a huge match of national importance, he gets stick for it...Messrs Waddle, Pearce, Southgate et al can certainly vouch for that.
The rather modern idea that we cannot possibly direct any stick at a player because he is a) too young b) black c) had a great tournament ... seems a bit potty to me.
There is certainly a good argument that Sir Gareth ballsed up in subbing Henderson and Trippier and Walker (seasoned pros all having vast experience in the highest pressure games and consummate penalty takers) and bringing on Rashford and Sancho with 20 seconds of extra time to play and then expecting effectively a sixth former to score the decisive penalty in the biggest game this country has played in 55 years!! but it still doesn't get away from the fact that giving stick to a millionaire footballer for missing a penalty is not such a bad thing. Let us not forget how Pearce responded to HIS stick. He responded with impeccable professionalism by scoring in the next penalty shootout and his punch in the air was that defiant punch in the air we all do when we work really hard to redeem ourselves, right a wrong, and persevere to the next level.
I fear that if we outlaw giving millionaire footballers stick (after all, we don't outlaw stick given to the lads down the local park!) then we rob them of their greatest victory - the victory of self improvement of fighting to get things right and for self mastery.
Give them all some stick. It is just what they need if we are going to get to the next level in Qatar in November 2022
Enjoy your next Cabinet meeting, Ollie. And don't forget to ask the Prime Minister if he still defends the fans' right to boo taking the knee.
What do you think the solution is with social media companies? What protest or action would be effective?
I wouldn't look to the platform as being the cause of the hate. And so, I wouldn't single out social media companies and attempt to fine them ten percent of their global revenues (which would never work) when some of their users abuse people.
If someone calls you on the phone and rants at you with foul, racist, anti-semitic, homophobic, transphobic, islamophobic or other abuse; and others also do so, you would (I hope) report that abuse to the police. I would expect the force then to go after those individuals. I wouldn't expect them to sue Apple or Samsung, or whoever makes your phone.
The vile perpetrators of online, racist - and other - abuse deserve to be punished; not the massive majority of people who go about using social media innocently and profitably (both in financially and in terms of personal development). Trying to fine Twitter ten percent of its global revenue would result in Twitter shutting down in the UK, rather than ponying up the dough. Then who wins?
The problem lies within the people who hold racist views; and the problem is exacerbated when those views are given succour. And that is provided by people from the widest-range of political viewpoint. Corbyn. Farage. Johnson. Patel. People look up to these politicians and see them encouraging, condoning or even joining in with their views. When the Prime Minister's spokesperson was asked, specifically, about taking the knee and the reaction to the England team doing so, the response was not, 'I fully support any action which demonstrates the urgent need to ensure football fans in England grow up to respect everyone who makes up this great country'. It was that he 'fully respects the right of those who choose to peacefully protest and make their feelings known'.
Well, John Q Racist of Hateville, Englandshire really knows what's ok now, doesn't he? He can tweet whatever he likes, because his Prime Minister 'fully respects' him and his peaceful protest against footballers who have deliberately chosen to be black, in order to offend his sensibilities.
You ask what protest would be effective? I believe what would really be effective is not a protest against social media or against the government. It should be a protest by the government and by social media.
The government and political leaders from all parties should protest against racists. Make it absolutely clear that their abhorrent behaviour is not just illegal, but it's deranged. Racism is a nasty, pervasive taint on an otherwise brilliant country. And Boris Johnson should make the very difficult decision to stand on a platform with politicians he is utterly opposed to, in order to stand together to face it down.
Social media companies should act further. They should not ban social media users who transgress, but should use the data they hold on them, against them. Even 'anonymous' accounts leave breadcrumb trails. Perpetrators of racism shouldn't be banned, they should be highlighted. To their friends, families, police, employers, sporting affiliations. The racist who will lose his job for tweeting racism, won't tweet racism. The racist who posts racism on facebook and thereby be banned by his football club, won't post racism.
And governments should support this use of data from social media companies where it fall foul of (current) laws.
Of course doing something effective is difficult, costly and time consuming. And it's always far, far easier to chuck red meat to your base and point a deflecting finger 'over there'.
A Cabinet minister saying the action his government (and all leaders of many other parties, from left to right) is helping to foment will be solved by fining social media companies - because they are the enemy - is the biggest imaginable deflection. And it's an astonishing irony that the Cabinet minister has chosen to do so on social media.
Social media companies need to take effective action which up to now they've chosen not to - allowing this stuff to stay up there and providing a platform is unacceptable. They've chosen to do this for financial reasons.
They won't take action without legislation as they think they are above the law.
I know it has been said before, but unfortunately the situation is not as simple as is being presented. It is certainly not the case that the social-media firms are leaving up clear racial abuse because of concerns over free speech. Such abuse would be a direct break of Terms of Service and would result in the account being immediately banned pending review, and then banned permanently. The difficulty comes when users can just open up a new account, and there is very little that can be done about that.
I am sure the social-media companies would pay almost anything to stop this from happening - the reputation loss and resulting loss of advertising alone would probably pay for it many times over - but sadly that does not mean that a workable solution currently exists.
It is generally the nature of things that when a footballer (and a multi-millionaire one at that!) misses a penalty in a huge match of national importance, he gets stick for it...Messrs Waddle, Pearce, Southgate et al can certainly vouch for that.
The rather modern idea that we cannot possibly direct any stick at a player because he is a) too young b) black c) had a great tournament ... seems a bit potty to me.
There is certainly a good argument that Sir Gareth ballsed up in subbing Henderson and Trippier and Walker (seasoned pros all having vast experience in the highest pressure games and consummate penalty takers) and bringing on Rashford and Sancho with 20 seconds of extra time to play and then expecting effectively a sixth former to score the decisive penalty in the biggest game this country has played in 55 years!! but it still doesn't get away from the fact that giving stick to a millionaire footballer for missing a penalty is not such a bad thing. Let us not forget how Pearce responded to HIS stick. He responded with impeccable professionalism by scoring in the next penalty shootout and his punch in the air was that defiant punch in the air we all do when we work really hard to redeem ourselves, right a wrong, and persevere to the next level.
I fear that if we outlaw giving millionaire footballers stick (after all, we don't outlaw stick given to the lads down the local park!) then we rob them of their greatest victory - the victory of self improvement of fighting to get things right and for self mastery.
Give them all some stick. It is just what they need if we are going to get to the next level in Qatar in November 2022
Why the need to criticise Saka at all Anyone can miss a penalty even the most experienced players in the world, such as Jorginho.
I know it has been said before, but unfortunately the situation is not as simple as is being presented. It is certainly not the case that the social-media firms are leaving up clear racial abuse because of concerns over free speech. Such abuse would be a direct break of Terms of Service and would result in the account being immediately banned pending review, and then banned permanently. The difficulty comes when users can just open up a new account, and there is very little that can be done about that.
I am sure the social-media companies would pay almost anything to stop this from happening - the reputation loss and resulting loss of advertising alone would probably pay for it many times over - but sadly that does not mean that a workable solution currently exists.
Who is looking for a workable solution? I really don't think social media companies care that much.
It is generally the nature of things that when a footballer (and a multi-millionaire one at that!) misses a penalty in a huge match of national importance, he gets stick for it...Messrs Waddle, Pearce, Southgate et al can certainly vouch for that.
The rather modern idea that we cannot possibly direct any stick at a player because he is a) too young b) black c) had a great tournament ... seems a bit potty to me.
There is certainly a good argument that Sir Gareth ballsed up in subbing Henderson and Trippier and Walker (seasoned pros all having vast experience in the highest pressure games and consummate penalty takers) and bringing on Rashford and Sancho with 20 seconds of extra time to play and then expecting effectively a sixth former to score the decisive penalty in the biggest game this country has played in 55 years!! but it still doesn't get away from the fact that giving stick to a millionaire footballer for missing a penalty is not such a bad thing. Let us not forget how Pearce responded to HIS stick. He responded with impeccable professionalism by scoring in the next penalty shootout and his punch in the air was that defiant punch in the air we all do when we work really hard to redeem ourselves, right a wrong, and persevere to the next level.
I fear that if we outlaw giving millionaire footballers stick (after all, we don't outlaw stick given to the lads down the local park!) then we rob them of their greatest victory - the victory of self improvement of fighting to get things right and for self mastery.
Give them all some stick. It is just what they need if we are going to get to the next level in Qatar in November 2022
Massive overreaction Bob surely?
I mean the post is terrible but unless I'm reading it wrong, isn't the poster just trying to say you cannot criticise him (as a black man) in case it comes across as racist? I mean I don't agree but it's not worthy of your response.
In hindsight, yes it was.
I've edited my post - perhaps you could edit the quote?
Enjoy your next Cabinet meeting, Ollie. And don't forget to ask the Prime Minister if he still defends the fans' right to boo taking the knee.
What do you think the solution is with social media companies? What protest or action would be effective?
I wouldn't look to the platform as being the cause of the hate. And so, I wouldn't single out social media companies and attempt to fine them ten percent of their global revenues (which would never work) when some of their users abuse people.
If someone calls you on the phone and rants at you with foul, racist, anti-semitic, homophobic, transphobic, islamophobic or other abuse; and others also do so, you would (I hope) report that abuse to the police. I would expect the force then to go after those individuals. I wouldn't expect them to sue Apple or Samsung, or whoever makes your phone.
The vile perpetrators of online, racist - and other - abuse deserve to be punished; not the massive majority of people who go about using social media innocently and profitably (both in financially and in terms of personal development). Trying to fine Twitter ten percent of its global revenue would result in Twitter shutting down in the UK, rather than ponying up the dough. Then who wins?
The problem lies within the people who hold racist views; and the problem is exacerbated when those views are given succour. And that is provided by people from the widest-range of political viewpoint. Corbyn. Farage. Johnson. Patel. People look up to these politicians and see them encouraging, condoning or even joining in with their views. When the Prime Minister's spokesperson was asked, specifically, about taking the knee and the reaction to the England team doing so, the response was not, 'I fully support any action which demonstrates the urgent need to ensure football fans in England grow up to respect everyone who makes up this great country'. It was that he 'fully respects the right of those who choose to peacefully protest and make their feelings known'.
Well, John Q Racist of Hateville, Englandshire really knows what's ok now, doesn't he? He can tweet whatever he likes, because his Prime Minister 'fully respects' him and his peaceful protest against footballers who have deliberately chosen to be black, in order to offend his sensibilities.
You ask what protest would be effective? I believe what would really be effective is not a protest against social media or against the government. It should be a protest by the government and by social media.
The government and political leaders from all parties should protest against racists. Make it absolutely clear that their abhorrent behaviour is not just illegal, but it's deranged. Racism is a nasty, pervasive taint on an otherwise brilliant country. And Boris Johnson should make the very difficult decision to stand on a platform with politicians he is utterly opposed to, in order to stand together to face it down.
Social media companies should act further. They should not ban social media users who transgress, but should use the data they hold on them, against them. Even 'anonymous' accounts leave breadcrumb trails. Perpetrators of racism shouldn't be banned, they should be highlighted. To their friends, families, police, employers, sporting affiliations. The racist who will lose his job for tweeting racism, won't tweet racism. The racist who posts racism on facebook and thereby be banned by his football club, won't post racism.
And governments should support this use of data from social media companies where it fall foul of (current) laws.
Of course doing something effective is difficult, costly and time consuming. And it's always far, far easier to chuck red meat to your base and point a deflecting finger 'over there'.
A Cabinet minister saying the action his government (and all leaders of many other parties, from left to right) is helping to foment will be solved by fining social media companies - because they are the enemy - is the biggest imaginable deflection. And it's an astonishing irony that the Cabinet minister has chosen to do so on social media.
Social media companies need to take effective action which up to now they've chosen not to - allowing this stuff to stay up there and providing a platform is unacceptable. They've chosen to do this for financial reasons.
They won't take action without legislation as they think they are above the law.
Social media companies don't post racist content, users do. Social media companies do not 'choose' to leave racist content online 'for financial reasons'. Social media companies do take action (although could and should do more). Social media companies are not 'above the law'.
I disagree that the the enabling platforms are the cause of the issue, neither are they solely responsible for the solution.
Pretending that the solution to racism in the UK is to fine social media companies is an utter abrogation of duty.
Racists are the problem; government should own - and be accountable for - the solution.
I have no IT knowledge but I do know that more could be done. I also know when these vile individuals who should be tracked down and the penalties should be draconian.
Southgate has made the comment that if he bought the subs on earlier we may well have lost in extra time. Do I agree with that? Possibly. But much has been made of our attacking potential,and we've hardly seen any of it. Would it not have been better to give it a go instead of heading straight towards the perilous penalties? Southgate knows better than anyone the pitfalls and the serious effects it can have on a youngsters life should they miss.
We bang on about experience,but to my mind GS showed zero of his when we really needed it.
I have no IT knowledge but I do know that more could be done. I also know when these vile individuals should be tracked down and the penalties should be draconian.
I am hoping that property company Savills and employee 'Andrew Bone' part company this morning. Unless they've already done so.
William obviously can't criticise the social media companies, as it might be seen as being too political
The fundamental problem is that the internet from the start has operated on anonymity, whether Twitter, Instagram or Charlton Life. In some respects that's a very good thing - imagine being a protester in a dictatorship trying to organise a campaign when everything you post was under your real name - but in others it's a terrible thing as it allows people to say unacceptable things, with a low chance of it being traced back to them
I have no IT knowledge but I do know that more could be done. I also know when these vile individuals should be tracked down and the penalties should be draconian.
I am hoping that property company Savills and employee 'Andrew Bone' part company this morning. Unless they've already done so.
and they should part company.
I have taken action in the past, including summary dismissal, and would do so again.
I have no IT knowledge but I do know that more could be done. I also know when these vile individuals should be tracked down and the penalties should be draconian.
How can you possibly track down and prove the guilt of someone who posts something from an account where the nearest thing you have to contact details for them is a username like JayBob8779?
Enjoy your next Cabinet meeting, Ollie. And don't forget to ask the Prime Minister if he still defends the fans' right to boo taking the knee.
What do you think the solution is with social media companies? What protest or action would be effective?
I wouldn't look to the platform as being the cause of the hate. And so, I wouldn't single out social media companies and attempt to fine them ten percent of their global revenues (which would never work) when some of their users abuse people.
If someone calls you on the phone and rants at you with foul, racist, anti-semitic, homophobic, transphobic, islamophobic or other abuse; and others also do so, you would (I hope) report that abuse to the police. I would expect the force then to go after those individuals. I wouldn't expect them to sue Apple or Samsung, or whoever makes your phone.
The vile perpetrators of online, racist - and other - abuse deserve to be punished; not the massive majority of people who go about using social media innocently and profitably (both in financially and in terms of personal development). Trying to fine Twitter ten percent of its global revenue would result in Twitter shutting down in the UK, rather than ponying up the dough. Then who wins?
The problem lies within the people who hold racist views; and the problem is exacerbated when those views are given succour. And that is provided by people from the widest-range of political viewpoint. Corbyn. Farage. Johnson. Patel. People look up to these politicians and see them encouraging, condoning or even joining in with their views. When the Prime Minister's spokesperson was asked, specifically, about taking the knee and the reaction to the England team doing so, the response was not, 'I fully support any action which demonstrates the urgent need to ensure football fans in England grow up to respect everyone who makes up this great country'. It was that he 'fully respects the right of those who choose to peacefully protest and make their feelings known'.
Well, John Q Racist of Hateville, Englandshire really knows what's ok now, doesn't he? He can tweet whatever he likes, because his Prime Minister 'fully respects' him and his peaceful protest against footballers who have deliberately chosen to be black, in order to offend his sensibilities.
You ask what protest would be effective? I believe what would really be effective is not a protest against social media or against the government. It should be a protest by the government and by social media.
The government and political leaders from all parties should protest against racists. Make it absolutely clear that their abhorrent behaviour is not just illegal, but it's deranged. Racism is a nasty, pervasive taint on an otherwise brilliant country. And Boris Johnson should make the very difficult decision to stand on a platform with politicians he is utterly opposed to, in order to stand together to face it down.
Social media companies should act further. They should not ban social media users who transgress, but should use the data they hold on them, against them. Even 'anonymous' accounts leave breadcrumb trails. Perpetrators of racism shouldn't be banned, they should be highlighted. To their friends, families, police, employers, sporting affiliations. The racist who will lose his job for tweeting racism, won't tweet racism. The racist who posts racism on facebook and thereby be banned by his football club, won't post racism.
And governments should support this use of data from social media companies where it fall foul of (current) laws.
Of course doing something effective is difficult, costly and time consuming. And it's always far, far easier to chuck red meat to your base and point a deflecting finger 'over there'.
A Cabinet minister saying the action his government (and all leaders of many other parties, from left to right) is helping to foment will be solved by fining social media companies - because they are the enemy - is the biggest imaginable deflection. And it's an astonishing irony that the Cabinet minister has chosen to do so on social media.
Social media companies need to take effective action which up to now they've chosen not to - allowing this stuff to stay up there and providing a platform is unacceptable. They've chosen to do this for financial reasons.
They won't take action without legislation as they think they are above the law.
Social media companies don't post racist content, users do. Social media companies do not 'choose' to leave racist content online 'for financial reasons'. Social media companies do take action (although could and should do more). Social media companies are not 'above the law'.
I disagree that the the enabling platforms are the cause of the issue, neither are they solely responsible for the solution.
Pretending that the solution to racism in the UK is to fine social media companies is an utter abrogation of duty.
Racists are the problem; government should own - and be accountable for - the solution.
How do you make social media companies police their sites more effectively or do you think sufficient is done at present?
I have no IT knowledge but I do know that more could be done. I also know when these vile individuals should be tracked down and the penalties should be draconian.
How can you possibly track down and prove the guilt of someone who posts something from an account where the nearest thing you have to contact details for them is a username like JayBob8779?
Then the level of account accountability needs to change.
William obviously can't criticise the social media companies, as it might be seen as being too political
The fundamental problem is that the internet from the start has operated on anonymity, whether Twitter, Instagram or Charlton Life. In some respects that's a very good thing - imagine being a protester in a dictatorship trying to organise a campaign when everything you post was under your real name - but in others it's a terrible thing as it allows people to say unacceptable things, with a low chance of it being traced back to them
He shares the anger, not calling the individuals and lumping all the blame on the platforms.
Giving players stick who miss a penalty doesn't help the next ones to take a penalty. Seriously, we need to catch those racially abusing players and actually punish them. Same with those booing national anthems. If you don't act, they think they can do it, which of course the can in the current climate.
Comments
Nothing ever seems to be their responsibility.
I mean the post is terrible but unless I'm reading it wrong, isn't the poster just trying to say you cannot criticise him (as a black man) in case it comes across as racist? I mean I don't agree but it's not worthy of your response.
If someone calls you on the phone and rants at you with foul, racist, anti-semitic, homophobic, transphobic, islamophobic or other abuse; and others also do so, you would (I hope) report that abuse to the police. I would expect the force then to go after those individuals. I wouldn't expect them to sue Apple or Samsung, or whoever makes your phone.
The vile perpetrators of online, racist - and other - abuse deserve to be punished; not the massive majority of people who go about using social media innocently and profitably (both in financially and in terms of personal development). Trying to fine Twitter ten percent of its global revenue would result in Twitter shutting down in the UK, rather than ponying up the dough. Then who wins?
The problem lies within the people who hold racist views; and the problem is exacerbated when those views are given succour. And that is provided by people from the widest-range of political viewpoint. Corbyn. Farage. Johnson. Patel. People look up to these politicians and see them encouraging, condoning or even joining in with their views. When the Prime Minister's spokesperson was asked, specifically, about taking the knee and the reaction to the England team doing so, the response was not, 'I fully support any action which demonstrates the urgent need to ensure football fans in England grow up to respect everyone who makes up this great country'. It was that he 'fully respects the right of those who choose to peacefully protest and make their feelings known'.
Well, John Q Racist of Hateville, Englandshire really knows what's ok now, doesn't he? He can tweet whatever he likes, because his Prime Minister 'fully respects' him and his peaceful protest against footballers who have deliberately chosen to be black, in order to offend his sensibilities.
You ask what protest would be effective? I believe what would really be effective is not a protest against social media or against the government. It should be a protest by the government and by social media.
- The government and political leaders from all parties should protest against racists. Make it absolutely clear that their abhorrent behaviour is not just illegal, but it's deranged. Racism is a nasty, pervasive taint on an otherwise brilliant country. And Boris Johnson should make the very difficult decision to stand on a platform with politicians he is utterly opposed to, in order to stand together to face it down.
- Social media companies should act further. They should not ban social media users who transgress, but should use the data they hold on them, against them. Even 'anonymous' accounts leave breadcrumb trails. Perpetrators of racism shouldn't be banned, they should be highlighted. To their friends, families, police, employers, sporting affiliations. The racist who will lose his job for tweeting racism, won't tweet racism. The racist who posts racism on facebook and thereby be banned by his football club, won't post racism.
- And governments should support this use of data from social media companies where it fall foul of (current) laws.
Of course doing something effective is difficult, costly and time consuming. And it's always far, far easier to chuck red meat to your base and point a deflecting finger 'over there'.A Cabinet minister saying the action his government (and all leaders of many other parties, from left to right) is helping to foment will be solved by fining social media companies - because they are the enemy - is the biggest imaginable deflection. And it's an astonishing irony that the Cabinet minister has chosen to do so on social media.
They won't take action without legislation as they think they are above the law.
One calls out the racists, one can't because his party needs their votes.
I've edited my post - perhaps you could edit the quote?
Social media companies do not 'choose' to leave racist content online 'for financial reasons'.
Social media companies do take action (although could and should do more).
Social media companies are not 'above the law'.
I disagree that the the enabling platforms are the cause of the issue, neither are they solely responsible for the solution.
Pretending that the solution to racism in the UK is to fine social media companies is an utter abrogation of duty.
Racists are the problem; government should own - and be accountable for - the solution.
Do I agree with that?
Possibly. But much has been made of our attacking potential,and we've hardly seen any of it.
Would it not have been better to give it a go instead of heading straight towards the perilous penalties?
Southgate knows better than anyone the pitfalls and the serious effects it can have on a youngsters life should they miss.
We bang on about experience,but to my mind GS showed zero of his when we really needed it.
William obviously can't criticise the social media companies, as it might be seen as being too political
The fundamental problem is that the internet from the start has operated on anonymity, whether Twitter, Instagram or Charlton Life. In some respects that's a very good thing - imagine being a protester in a dictatorship trying to organise a campaign when everything you post was under your real name - but in others it's a terrible thing as it allows people to say unacceptable things, with a low chance of it being traced back to them
I have taken action in the past, including summary dismissal, and would do so again.