It can work in the other direction too; the daft furore about Bevanite Ellie brought her to my attention and the half-baked character assassination by the Mail just makes me want to vote Labour more.

I don’t think Twitter knows what it is yet; it’s suffering from a severe existentialist crists (as witnessed by the latest plan to “sell” featured tweets). But I do think Labour was right to sack MacLennan – if a Toryboy had said what he did we on the left would be (rightly) outraged. Double standards should not apply.

(also, if the Tories had any shred of manners about them they’d get rid of this buffoon Chris Hawes http://www.blueidea.co.uk/2008/09/party-pooper-clegg.html standing for council in Leavesden. unless calling the leader of a national party a c— is perfectly reasonable behaviour these days.)

There is a common misconception that Twitter is a young persons medium and that was why BevaniteEllie fetched up at the Labour manifesto launch.

It ain’t – the average age of Twitter users is over 35. Only around 10% of users are under 24. Twitter’s most famous user Stephen Fry is 52.

Twitter is just another medium, it can be used for good or bad, and is generally jsut mundane. However, like all net mediums people using Twitter do tend to be be more abusive than they would be in a face-to-face discussion.

Where was the “character assassination”?

I read on the Mail website that she thinks Ed Balls is “fabulous” and that she cries when reading Polly Toynbee.

Ah, OK, I see what you mean…

@4

Yes, very droll… But I think basing at entirely negative article on what someone said two years ago is a pretty low blow tbh. As well as dragging photos from facebook. Would you want to be judged on your views from when you were 18? I know I wouldn’t!

Perhaps best not to agree to introduce the PM at a manifesto launch if you’re shy?

I siad this over at LO’s gaff but I’ll say it here:

Two things…

Twitter sucks ass, also has done and always will, it is used by a tiny minority of the UK population, excludes vast swathes of people and is, in the words of Paul Sagar, fucking shit.

Second thing is a riff on another of Paul Sagar’s thoughts about how stuff like this exists, on the Interwebs, for all time or until you delete it or whatever. It can become a weight around the neck, hence the raft of people who use such services hiding behind anonymity or and I prefer this take; your words stay there and reflect you at the time and you can either stand by them or retreat like a heartless coward.

We have to have more nuanced debate than: they said summat daft, kill them!

I am more than aware that if I become at all famous my blog, which has some deeply unsavoury as well as utterly brilliant content, will be poured over and things chucked in my face.

Two words: fuck ‘em and a third for good measure: context.

It will be poured over before it is purred over.

And of course it must be pored over first of all.

@7 DHG:

…you can either stand by them or retreat like a heartless coward.

And what if you – quite legitimately – change your mind? Are you still a ‘heartless coward’, or are you someone who is intelligent enough to not stick to one dogmatic belief no matter how fool-hardy? Plenty of people change their minds about stuff – it’s part of being human. I don’t see why Ellie has had the nastiest forces of the Right unleashed on her for something that she said two years ago.

@6 cjcjc

Perhaps best not to agree to introduce the PM at a manifesto launch if you’re shy?

I think that somewhat (willfully) misses the point. If the Daily Fail has nothing better to do and no better line of attack than to pull up an article by a young activist from two years ago – to smear the Labour Party today – then the Conservatives are in worse shape than I thought (which gives me hope, at least).

Mr S. Pill:

You’ve mis-read me so I’ll clarify.

Mind changing is all good and I often have and have a permanent record of such moments at my blog and on many issues, such as my feelings towards Islam, it is most useful.

To clarify, I am talking about people who delete or hide previous views with no context, no notation or explanation, or those that are cowed into a volte-face purely because their musings are deemed, by whomever, inappropriate.

Hope that’s clearer and cjcjcjcjcjc, spelling pedantry never looks good, least of all on you.

@11 DHG:

Ah ok, thanks for clearing that up

I am sure @2 you will be pleased to hear that Chris Hawes has stepped down see http://ldv.org.uk/18896.

This debate should have ended with the quote

“Twitter is little more than a bunch of idiots expressing half-baked thoughts, joining herds of other stampeding #idiots, and at very best linking their “followers” to other place that aren’t Twitter, where things of substance are actually going on.”

You can’t actually add to that; it’s word perfect.

@14 Do you realise the irony that your comment also perfectly fits that description?

@13: hooray! a small victory for decency!