Tattle In The Press

[Yel]

You can view messages live as they're posted, it's quite interesting. And if someone did a few minutes watching this they'd see it's mainly innocuous stuff. Anyone that genuinely hates and influencer isnt suitable for tattle. It's a gossip site that doesn't allow hateful content

Live Posts

tattle.life

For every thread you can click to view the most liked posts so newbies can quickly get an idea of what tattle is and isn't. You can even do that for a tag and view the most liked posts across hundreds of threads.

 

[Yel]

It's disheartening all the cancel culture tattle faces while the male dominated equivariant sites don't attract any such publicity. The only ones that do are the actual abhorrent ones with links to terrorism, harassment, neo nazis etc.

But I guess if the national press and all these beauty/style magazines call tattle the worst site on the internet then it must be true

 

[sixdinnersid83]

These people swanning about on Twitter, Reddit, Facebook, mumsnet. Complaining about tattle-
Is there no bigger illustration of irony?

 

[Sideboard Bob]

I saw this and isn’t it about the hundredth Grazia article slinging at Tattle? It winds me up because they never do an interview with a user from here and ask there POV, it’s literally just same article written every time a journo gets annoyed with the site . Grazia need to learn balance

I’d love to know what Grazia’s problem with Tattle really is,
I posted this in another thread but it makes more sense here...

The writer, who is so much of an influencer that she doesn’t even have a thread here, just happens to work for a PR company, who just happen to represent a quite few people who do have tattle threads

Team — Social Inspire Group

www.socialinspiregroup.com

 

[Yel]

Any journalists should do some real work and actually read the forums as all the information is already written down. No need to interview anyone, the forums speak for themselves. I do think many of these hacks are looking for someone to chuck under a bus with their same old dirty tricks of asking leading questions and misrepresenting answers.

Every single article has been terribly one sided and biased and tattle doesn't even give any response anymore because they only ever used 20% of it to twist to their own agenda. I'm sure they'd do the same for posters or just make up a poster all together to suit their agenda.

 

[soph30]

Why do ALL articles about Tattle always get the wrong end of the stick?! It’s not a site to ‘turn on’ anyone, it’s a site for free discussion

 

[BigMavis]

Maybe the press should start reporting the exploitation that is going on, I am tired of influencers using mental health issues and serious mental illness to deflect criticism, to increase engagement and make sales.

 

[Withwhat]

Very muted response to it even on twitter. Not many likes or retweets.

Well everyone’s 3 pages into the thread on their favourite hate watch. Won’t surface for days

 

[PineappleQueen19]

The timing of the daily fail article is interesting because an investigative report into the use of paid accounts/bots to coordinate hate against Harry & Megan was released from embargo at midnight. Some journalists have egg on their faces for how they interacted with these accounts. Some of the things the accounts made up made its way into mainstream media.
It’s very convenient right now to conflate trolling & coordinated hate with gossip and Tattle is an easy target

https://www.thecut.com/2022/01/new-report-meghan-markle-was-focus-of-twitter-hate-campaign.html

 

[Yel]

I'm not sure I can even be bothered to watch it, Sali Hughes will spout off her same old one sided story totally unchallenged (it would crumble with a tiny bit of fact checking).

Seems very unwise to pass blame to "trolls" for an arson investigation that's unsolved. You'd think they'd stick to the police facts, but the trailer has showed they won't.

I gather baddiel used to present a football show where they insulted and ridiculed players. But that's all allowed, boys will be boys and men are allowed bants

 

[Veronicaaa]

so this article actually references that guy who implicated that charity ceo, but it's still tattle that's the most "hate-filled" place on the internet?

Exactly - the people who come out badly in this piece are the ones who are attempting to dox tattlers. It's such a weirdly confusing article!

 

[Yel]

Oh definitely we're no saints on a gossip forum. But the worst you get is bitchy comments and I'd file them under not that bad. If there's anything bordering on abusive or hateful we'd take action.

The problem is everyone has a different opinion of what's acceptable on a gossip forum. Some want all talk of appearance off limits, others want all talk of appearance banned unless it's about procedures they've chosen to have done and others want to only talk about appearance if the influencer photoshops themselves heavily.

You could spend all day trying to please people and end up pleasinging no one. If everything that could cause offense was banned there would be nothing left to talk about.

We all have things we find triggering, that's so hard to avoid in life. It's probably best to talk about what you want to and don't respond to stuff you don't like.

Some comments if you don't know the backstory can look quite bad. Like the Kate Hayes thread, she's always lying about her size and editing her pictures heavily. So the comments are mainly about the misrepresentation (not that I've read it recently).

It's all a bit of a moot point as only a tiny amount of comments on the whole are about appearance. Influencers like to pretend tattle is all about death threats and calling people ugly.

Diabetes is something that comes up a fair bit in reports. Someone says something like "they'll give themselves diabetes eating like that" and quite a few people find this triggering as it's not differentiating between type 1 and type 2. I totally get why people that have misery caused by this disease might be upset by it. But as mods it's a pretty impossible situation.

End of the day the comments here are not @ someone in their feed and they'd have to go out of their way to read. Becoming a public figure will attract the public making comments about them. This is nothing new; it's as inevitable is the sun rising. It's a healthy part of society for the little people to comment on those in a position of power and influence.

 

[Yel]

The article is a great ad for that internet lawyer, had the guy not already admitted that little can be done for even the most hateful extremist content (which we don't have on here). So I hope no one falls for him and thinks if they give him a few grand they can get comments here removed. Well done the guardian for promoting that

Tattle doesn't even know who someone is unless they sign up with an outing email so it's near impossible to identify anyone.

This means little is off-limits, says internet lawyer Yair Cohen. He explains that because many gossip sites originated in America, US law grants them almost total immunity from regulation.

The country’s laws on free speech mean even the most offensive views, such as Holocaust denial, are allowed to be aired there.

----

I find it funny how a petition from 3 years ago is always mentioned. The only reason it has any signatures is because we let it get posted on tattle and all the influencers fell for promoting it so only promoted tattle .

It should have millions of signatures by now rather than the dismal 70k. Still it could have millions and it would be just as meaningless. Change org petitions dont make something legally binding when it gets a certain amount of signatures

 

[EllaEm87]

You don't need to be registered to view attachments - we changed that a while ago as quite frankly it's busy enough and don't need to encourage people to register. It can be so exhausting keeping on top of the modding

And what an excellent job you all do of keeping us on the right side of the line!

 

[Clover123]

That article was a hot mess! You can tell there wasn't actually anything bad, or they would have quoted it! Some random lady saying she was worried people might have reported her to child services, with there being no proof that happened, and brands being put off by complaints about influencers they'd worked with... you would be mad to think that's anywhere near as bad as Twitter! There are incredibly sinister dark corners of the internet, but I've seen way worse on reddit threads and no one is calling for that to be shut down

I think it will just drive people here tbh, they'll realise it's actually valid criticisms with strict rules, and also that it has to be sought out by influencers rather than posted under their Instagram pages. Nice try Guardian, but that article makes no sense whatsoever

 

[Yel]

But social media encourages mean girl behaviour. The algorithm always knows that messy drama means you’ll stick around for longer. That’s why sites like Tattle Life have thousands of critical threads about celebrities, and very few positive ones.

It kinda misses the point, if someone wants to praise someone they'd post it on their feed.

Tattle has grown because people try to silence any criticism. I wouldn't say the critical things I say about celebs @ them, because that would be trolling.

Anyway tattle isn't algorithm based. It's a traditional forum where people are in total control over what content they see. They can use that argument at big tech and the manipulation to keep on a platform for as long as possible, but not here.

 

[heretoreaditall2019]

You what? 'Women of colour' are treated especially badly on Tattle?
How can they put out this stuff with literally no evidence?

Omg how fucking rude! As opposed to what, how well WoC are treated by social media platforms that refuse to apply the same tech they do to references of covid to filter out racial slurs? The same platform where BAME influencers constant receive grief? That shit wouldn’t fly on tattle! Tbh most the discussion around race here is criticising the performance of allyship that came out of the #BLM “moment” (eurgh at saying that) and how none of them have followed up since they were pretty much obliged to feign caring for black people! The contributions here are more long form & nuanced than is even possible on Twitter anyway so you get a more balanced discussion of these sensitive issues than just sharing a black square and calling it a day. We hold influencers to account for doing just that to then continuing on forgetting their commitments to anti racism in favour for the next Barbour campaign full of white women. Fuck them for making out like it’s a hot bed of racism.

 

[FrannyGallops]

What's the betting she'll have no response from the normal people here on tattle so will invent 'Susan' a married 43 year old mother who puts the kids to bed and then stays up til the small hours drinking wine and trolling Mrs Hinch 🥱🥱🥱

‘Susan’ will also break down in tears when confronted with her cowardly behaviour and prostrate herself at the feet of the influencer she’s been slagging off, just like Sali Hughes (imaginary) ‘troll’ did too.

It’s weird how they never find someone who can lay out an argument in a clear and concise manner of what exactly their problem with influencers is, like majority of people who use this site can, for example. And they should be investigating the reason why no one on this site wants to come forward, which is usually because they don’t want to be trolled (in the true definition of the word) or bullied when the influencers sets their followers on them. Let’s not forget quite a few influencers threaten to doxx anyone who dares say anything against them, and some even threaten to send their friends n o n c e of a husband round to their door.

 

[petitspois]

Each year, the Daily Mail do the usual photo spread of the Grand National, Ascot, Cheltenham, more so of the people who attend thone racecourses. Years ago, they could print offensive comments from journalists to accompany each picture. Then fast forward a few years and a law was brought in regarding journalists and that they were not allowed to publish derogatory comments about people’s appearance, etc. So to get around this, they continued to publish hideous photographs of people, but added text that most people could see beyond, knew that they were being sarcastic. They do the same with everybody, Carol Vordermann, Liz Cundy, Gemma Collins, anyone who looks a state, they will publish the worst photograph of them and dress it up with sarcastic text, pretending they think that person is a looker.

What gets me on top of the shitty misogyny is how they can't proofread at all. The same sentences appear several times in the first couple of paragraphs.

 

[House of Tea]

Big article about Tattle in the Daily Mail today. Am expecting an influx of new members.

View attachment 998794

My favourite bit is where the author (Hi Clare!! Thanks for registering x) says many of us are "remarkably articulate". Sorry to disappoint that we're not all sitting at home going 'goo goo ga ga' whilst pointing excitedly at daytime telly. Annoying that these articles never, ever mention Jack Monroe even though she's the grist of some of our most popular threads.

That remarkably articulate bit, I am going to add that to my CV

https://archive.is/l9cj3

I love it when the daily mail is the morality police for gossip.

The amount of articles they get from reading here, like the Alice evens thread.

Sadly it's not more popular than Mumsnet, they've pulled those figures from thin air and doesn't get anywhere near that number of visitors.

Think it is the Evans threads that piqued their interest.