Yes that seems to be it - but even influencers aren't daft enough to believe anyone would be sympathetic, so they introduce a whole load of unproved accusations (unchallenged by any journalist). They feel scared for their lives, people here are ringing social services and contacting their employers etc etc. Not one scrap of evidence. But it sounds better than 'they laugh at me and accuse me of scamming and exploiting my children'.
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
Well the point is yes of course someone who posts on Tattle could also have contacted Social Services, but as you say there is no proof. I imagine a lawyer would have to prove Tattle encourages and enables such behaviour, which obviously is not the case.
How can any large organisation/forum police the behaviour of every single member and be held accountable for an individual?
Tattle Life seems to be held to far higher levels of scrutiny and judgement than almost any other SM forum I can think of. When it actually seems far more tightly regulated and policed than most.
So much pearl-clutching on Twitter about Tattle, it’s ridiculous. And the hilarious thing is you know it’s those hypocrites who will be glued to this site more than anyone else.
And all the ‘you mark my words, there’ll be a suicide caused by that website soon enough’ claims are nothing short of ghoulish. And also stupid as it shows a fundamental lack of understanding of correlation and causation.
And all the ‘you mark my words, there’ll be a suicide caused by that website soon enough’ claims are nothing short of ghoulish. And also stupid as it shows a fundamental lack of understanding of correlation and causation.
It‘s interesting that that Guardian article isn’t open for comments. Because if it was, there are so many things that have been said in this thread that we could say there, and show how misleading the article is.
It fucks me off so much! The very same people who are meant to be so concerned about mental health and knowledgeable about the guidelines around reporting it, and they're basically insinuating that if you continue to post on this site you'll cause a death like that? Just casually in the middle of an article. It's really awful.
They should know better, the Samaritans have very clear guidelines for journalists on how to write about those topics in a sensitive, respectful and non-triggering way.
Yes and it all smacks of them putting their ‘warning’ out there so they can hark back to it with a smug ‘don’t say you weren’t warned’ when the inevitable happens. So grim and self serving.
Yes totally agree. And as you say extremely ghoulish. The ones who keep hinting at it seem almost to be salivating at the prospect so they can say 'look! told you so!' (I know they aren't. But it just goes to show how words can be manipulated and twisted to fit an agenda).
As inappropriate as poor David Ames being used as a stick to beat here.
Yes, I'd looked for the opportunity to comment on the article.
So many lies in that article like the 43.2m visits - did she add the .2 to make it seem accurate when it's nothing more than a wild guess? That would be 240k visits a day, which is 250-300% higher than the real figure for the last 6 months.
Also tattle is featured in the national press every month and has been for nearly 2 years. Hardly without mainstream recognition. While the visitors to the site is significant it's hardly one of the most visited sites in the country.
Things like the nationality of people spoken about is something publicly available, but rather than do any investigation she's just said it's almost all British and ignore the significant number of Irish and American threads.
This level of journalism is just embarrassing.
"Quietly, without mainstream recognition, Tattle has become one of the most-visited – and hate-filled – websites in the UK. There were 43.2m visits to Tattle in the last six months alone, mostly from British users. (Almost all the people discussed on Tattle are British.)"
Also tattle is featured in the national press every month and has been for nearly 2 years. Hardly without mainstream recognition. While the visitors to the site is significant it's hardly one of the most visited sites in the country.
Things like the nationality of people spoken about is something publicly available, but rather than do any investigation she's just said it's almost all British and ignore the significant number of Irish and American threads.
This level of journalism is just embarrassing.
"Quietly, without mainstream recognition, Tattle has become one of the most-visited – and hate-filled – websites in the UK. There were 43.2m visits to Tattle in the last six months alone, mostly from British users. (Almost all the people discussed on Tattle are British.)"
I saw someone on the author's twitter say the fact Tattle is British makes it more sinister. Why? What a bizarre comment. It is like they fasten on anything to be outraged at. (Sirin wotsit agreed with the comment - 'yes it does somehow'
)To be fair, Britain *is* very sinisterI saw someone on the author's twitter say the fact Tattle is British makes it more sinister. Why? What a bizarre comment. It is like they fasten on anything to be outraged at. (Sirin wotsit agreed with the comment - 'yes it does somehow'
Journalism to generate clicks and revenue, calls out Forum for making money on advertising. Oh the irony.
Do they think sites are hosted and maintained on thin air, with no costs?
This piece lacks a level of investigation and in depth research.
The journo shared link to story via twitter, the platform where ppl have posted content that had lead to actual convictions.
So let's tar every1 with same brush.....aint she also guilty of these crimes as she uses the same platform.
Do they think sites are hosted and maintained on thin air, with no costs?
This piece lacks a level of investigation and in depth research.
The journo shared link to story via twitter, the platform where ppl have posted content that had lead to actual convictions.
So let's tar every1 with same brush.....aint she also guilty of these crimes as she uses the same platform.
it came up on my facebook so people were commenting under it, about half were just variations on "I have never heard of this before, might go and check it out"
the comments on a guardian article were where i originally found out about tattle so well done to them for publicising it for more people . The whole article is just typical lazy journalism, doesn't look like the journo has ever visited the site, I imagine Sali Huges just gave the quotes etc that were used exactly, from reading the article you would imagine tattle was something like 4 chan or whatever that site was, reddit is much worse than tattle in so many ways but of course it is the site which is largely female dominated that is criticised more
Malone got slaughtered in that article didn't he. There was no need for the journo to include his text after the interview were he called himself Irelands number one motivational talker....but she did. Must say that whole debacle with him and throll busters was the strangest and funniest episode I've ever encountered here. Anyway that piece is just more white noise, laughable really but with insidious undertones and to think I used to rate the guardian.
Yeah - they royally ripped the piss out of Big Andy! Too funny!!!!!!
Who could blame her? I’d of done the exact same thing. It’s the most revealing part of the entire article. Tattle is a place to have fun slagging off influencers. Sometimes it’s just too easy
Ireland's number 1 (self certified) motivational speaker and entrepreneur Andy Malone seems quite unwell.
I do think it's a bit different people slating these public figures on a niche gossip forum compared to a national newspaper that has an (undeserved) good reputation that's in tens of thousands of shops and gets more visitors in a day than tattle gets in a year.
The guardian can hardly claim the moral high ground.
I do think it's a bit different people slating these public figures on a niche gossip forum compared to a national newspaper that has an (undeserved) good reputation that's in tens of thousands of shops and gets more visitors in a day than tattle gets in a year.
The guardian can hardly claim the moral high ground.
So basically she did what she accuses tattle of. Strange that.Who could blame her? I’d of done the exact same thing. It’s the most revealing part of the entire article. Tattle is a place to have fun slagging off influencers. Sometimes it’s just too easy