Chris Powell receives racist tweets from so called Wednesday fans

[Pompeyowl]

How can you be even partly responsible for being abused just by being present?!

[Sonny]

Perhaps a newspaper could print some racist abuse to a famous person and the famous person would be partly responsible just for having the nerve to be alive... and famous... and black.

[Guest Distraught!]

How can you be even partly responsible for being abused just by being present?!

 

By making your account easy to access. You can choose to cover identity using a different login known only to your close acquaintances. You can choose not to use social media in this way at all (as many well known people choose not to). I would call it user discretion.  Making yourself accessible means running the risk of making yourself open to abuse.

[Guest Distraught!]

Perhaps a newspaper could print some racist abuse to a famous person and the famous person would be partly responsible just for having the nerve to be alive... and famous... and black.

 

That is a million miles away from the point. People can exist but modern social media means they become more accessible. It is clear that there are plenty on Twitter that "stalk" well known people for all kinds of reasons. Sometimes they become delusional and getting a reply off a celebrity automatically makes them good buddies. Other people try to barge in on online conversations that celebrities are having. Other people just go there to abuse. In my opinion, by making yourself accessible you take the rough with the smooth.

[Guest Distraught!]

If I called you a C*** now then it wouldn't be your fault for having an Owlstalk log-in, famous or not.

 

That is not what I said either. I know by using the internet or social media that I run the risk of being abused. The further up the celebrity ladder you go, the more that risk increases. I have no problem with celebrities that want to take that risk but they should also understand the possible ramifications of doing so. 

[Sonny]

I don't think the point is a million miles away at all.

Either way, you're saying that black people with any kind of public profile should expect, and are even partly responsible for, any abuse they get.

As I said, If I called you a C*** now then it wouldn't be your fault for having an Owlstalk log-in, famous or not.

There's no difference. If you abuse someone then you're at fault. 100%.

Edited February 26, 2014 by Sonny

[Guest Distraught!]

I don't think the point is a million miles away at all.

Either way, you're saying that black people with any kind of public profile should expect, and are even partly responsible for, any abuse they get.

As I said, If I called you a C*** now then it wouldn't be your fault for having an Owlstalk log-in, famous or not.

There's no difference. If you abuse someone then you're at fault. 100%.

 

1. I don't think online abuse is restricted to racial issues. Online abuse covers many facets.

    

2. If I were a celebrity and I had a Twitter account under my name, I would accept some of the risk I was taking. 

    

3. The last point, I am not even going to go into. Each can have their own individual point of view. When courts deal with crime, they look at many different issues including provocation. There would be those that would argue that assassinated public figures were partly responsible for their own deaths because they made themselves accessible in various situations. Other would argue it is 100% the fault of the person doing the assassinating.

[Sonny]

Utterly bonkers crazy opinion there pal. I was only going into it because you brought it up. I don't think there's any need for more.

[OxonOwl]

Famous people shouldn't go out in the street. They are only risking some idiot shouting abuse at them.

 

But then again, the risk of being prosecuted means that it isn't very likely someone who would do that.

 

Social media is different, famous people will get abused because folk think they won't get prosecuted. So you famous folk better stay off social media.

 

Oh, wait a minute. Wouldn't it be better if we pursued the abusers, whatever the media, rather than restrict what famous people can do?

 

Oh I don't know. It's a real conundrum, isn't it?

[Guest Distraught!]

Utterly bonkers crazy opinion there pal. I was only going into it because you brought it up. I don't think there's any need for more.

 

Go to the thread about Gary Madine.

 

Within that thread, there are posters suggesting the Madine keeps clear of Twitter.

 

Why do you think that should be?

[Guest Distraught!]

 

Oh I don't know. It's a real conundrum, isn't it?

 

Yes, the only thing the internet does is make it easier for the prats to carry out the abuse knowing that there is actually very little that can be done.

 

One of those links earlier in thread was to a BBC site that suggested something like 34000 cases of racial abuse took place last year. I wonder what percentage of those went to court and what the conviction rate was like? I would hazard a guess of less than 5%.

[Sonny]

Go to the thread about Gary Madine.

Within that thread, there are posters suggesting the Madine keeps clear of Twitter.

Why do you think that should be?

I'm not reading a whole thread about Gary Madine. I assume it's about 10 pages long. Sorry. Link to the posts if you want me to comment on something.

[Guest Distraught!]

I'm not reading a whole thread about Gary Madine. I assume it's about 10 pages long. Sorry. Link to the posts if you want me to comment on something.

 

It matters not. The question is clear. Why is it that other posters on this very forum would rather Madine keep clear of Twitter?

 

Another point:

 

I remember an occasion when Kaven Walker came onto this site just prior to getting his cards. There was a strong chance that he might have received abusive comments that could well have been very offensive. The administrator would have needed to be very damn quick to delete them before they appeared online. I wonder how many on this forum would have taken the viewpoint that "he knew what he was letting himself in for" had such abuse been received? I would hazard a guess more than a few.

[Pompeyowl]

By making your account easy to access. You can choose to cover identity using a different login known only to your close acquaintances. You can choose not to use social media in this way at all (as many well known people choose not to). I would call it user discretion.  Making yourself accessible means running the risk of making yourself open to abuse.

 

 

Ofcourse you're making yourself accessible to abuse, but you're not responsible in any way, shape or form for the vulgarities of some.

[Guest Distraught!]

Ofcourse you're making yourself accessible to abuse, but you're not responsible in any way, shape or form for the vulgarities of some.

 

That's the conundrum of it all though, isn't it? 

 

Anybody that uses an online forum is not necessarily responsible for information they receive whether it be abuse or otherwise but you are responsible for your own conduct. Celebrities know beforehand (as everyone does) that the internet attracts certain people that might become abusive if given the chance. By making yourself open to such people, do you or do you not hold some responsibility if you end up getting abused? granted, you are not responsibility for the type or content of the abuse but you have made yourself open to receiving it.

 

In an ideal world, there would of course be no abuse. But sports stars will attract all kinds of people. For footballers, this will include rival supporters looking to stir up trouble.  My interest in this subject came about because of a very attractive female Asian celebrity who attracted perverts and stalkers on a website similar to Twitter. The general public was split between whether she should have taken some of the responsibility because she was specifically warned of the potential risks before she used it. I think there will be many more test cases over the years related to the subject.

[Pompeyowl]

That's the conundrum of it all though, isn't it? 

 

Anybody that uses an online forum is not necessarily responsible for information they receive whether it be abuse or otherwise but you are responsible for your own conduct. Celebrities know beforehand (as everyone does) that the internet attracts certain people that might become abusive if given the chance. By making yourself open to such people, do you or do you not hold some responsibility if you end up getting abused? granted, you are not responsibility for the type or content of the abuse but you have made yourself open to receiving it.

 

In an ideal world, there would of course be no abuse. But sports stars will attract all kinds of people. For footballers, this will include rival supporters looking to stir up trouble.  My interest in this subject came about because of a very attractive female Asian celebrity who attracted perverts and stalkers on a website similar to Twitter. The general public was split between whether she should have taken some of the responsibility because she was specifically warned of the potential risks before she used it. I think there will be many more test cases over the years related to the subject.

 

 

No, they're not. It's like saying that you're partly responsible if you get glassed in a club. You know that a high percentage of the crowd will be sozzled and that there will be idiots among them. 

 

You can't be responsible for idiots acting as idiots. I get the point you're trying to make, but I just can't agree that any responsibility / blame can be placed on the shoulders of anyone, public figure or not, who is subject to any form of abuse on the interent..... Or anywhere for that matter.

[Guest Distraught!]

No, they're not. It's like saying that you're partly responsible if you get glassed in a club. You know that a high percentage of the crowd will be sozzled and that there will be idiots among them. 

 

You can't be responsible for idiots acting as idiots. I get the point you're trying to make, but I just can't agree that any responsibility / blame can be placed on the shoulders of anyone, public figure or not, who is subject to any form of abuse on the interent..... Or anywhere for that matter.

 

OK, I'm bored of the subject anyway at this stage.

 

I have just left myself open to endless abuse anyway which will all be my own fault for being on here. 

[Pompeyowl]

OK, I'm bored of the subject anyway at this stage.

 

I have just left myself open to endless abuse anyway which will all be my own fault for being on here.