Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Greavsy

Social media boycott views?

Recommended Posts

https://www.canaries.co.uk/News/2021/april/club-urges-fans-and-football-family-to-join-social-media-boycott/

So all clubs are boycotting social media as detailed above, for a very worthy reason, and have asked supporters, fan bases, and the like to follow suit. 

Obviously depending on your use of such platforms, what are your views (on supporting / Joining the boycott, not what it stands for, as I think we can all agree that a good cause). 

Are we likely to see less people on here over the weekend, the weekend we could finally get the title? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So will you still be starting your plethora of threads, and commenting on others during the boycott period? 

Just curious, not judging, although it does sound like it, apologies. 

Apart from a few comments in other posts the boycott, and participation thereof hasn't been discussed much. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What will happen to Podcasts this weekend ? Asking for a friend as i don't watch them.

Edited by TIL 1010

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was only on Facebook and came off that months ago. Best decision i ever made. 

A platform for narcissistics and the mentally unstable. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Chelm Canary said:

I was only on Facebook and came off that months ago. Best decision i ever made. 

A platform for narcissistics and the mentally unstable. 

Probably not best to use mental health as a way of insulting people you clearly didn't agree with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Chelm Canary said:

I was only on Facebook and came off that months ago. Best decision i ever made. 

A platform for narcissistics and the mentally unstable. 

Sounds just like the Pink'Un then

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, chicken said:

Probably not best to use mental health as a way of insulting people you clearly didn't agree with.

Point taken. Poor use of words. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

Sounds just like the Pink'Un then

One may suggest that making such quips may indeed backfire. Some could argue that the creation of multiple threads a day could well at least meet some of the criteria of this definition:

"is a mental condition in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for excessive attention and admiration"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get why clubs are doing it, but as said above, sadly I dont think anything will change. I dont have insta, Facebook twitter or anything. I just come on here for a wind up and occasional read good comments. All social media is poison in my eyes. Trolls, racists, homophobics all over the world. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

The point of the social media boycott is because Facebook, Twitter and Instagram aren't being active enough when it comes to abuse. I don't think this accusation has been levelled at Archant, so I don't see any reason to boycott the Pink Un.

no offence WWIAFTM but isnt that a bit of a NIMBY attitude? 

Some forums / platforms have it worse that others I agree, but just because (in your view) the pink un doesnt, its doesnt meant other forums dont. Or someone else may think this one does. One persons banter is another persons insult. 

For it to be effective it has to be across the board surely ? 

If the perpetrators cannot post on one platform, due to the boycott, there is nothing to stop them moving to another for the duration. It merely kicks the can down the road. If they had no outlet, 100% it would make them sit up and think surely?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Ward 3 said:

I get why clubs are doing it, but as said above, sadly I dont think anything will change. I dont have insta, Facebook twitter or anything. I just come on here for a wind up and occasional read good comments. All social media is poison in my eyes. Trolls, racists, homophobics all over the world. 

Do you count forums as social media Ward3 ?  Im guessing some do, and some dont. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Greavsy said:

Do you count forums as social media Ward3 ?  Im guessing some do, and some dont. 

I suppose I do, good question mate. I do for 'socialising' with others and reacting to other comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

no offence WWIAFTM but isnt that a bit of a NIMBY attitude? 

Some forums / platforms have it worse that others I agree, but just because (in your view) the pink un doesnt, its doesnt meant other forums dont. Or someone else may think this one does. One persons banter is another persons insult. 

For it to be effective it has to be across the board surely ? 

If the perpetrators cannot post on one platform, due to the boycott, there is nothing to stop them moving to another for the duration. It merely kicks the can down the road. If they had no outlet, 100% it would make them sit up and think surely?  

I disagree completely. 

If you have a problem with the owner of one particular (large) pub, you don't go into that pub. You still frequent other pubs where the owners are sound.

Just because the big social media companies are having problems policing themselves, doesn't mean you should also deprive smaller companies of traffic when they have done nothing wrong.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ward 3 said:

I suppose I do, good question mate. I do for 'socialising' with others and reacting to other comments.

That's the problem, the lines get somewhat blurred. 

Its not only Celebs, Corporations, sports / TV stars who can post on the likes of  twitter , insta , snapchat, tic-toc, but ordinary members of the public too,  and also the use of forums like this, facebook etc, there are just too many to name, let alone categorize. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

I disagree completely. 

If you have a problem with the owner of one particular (large) pub, you don't go into that pub. You still frequent other pubs where the owners are sound.

Just because the big social media companies are having problems policing themselves, doesn't mean you should also deprive smaller companies of traffic when they have done nothing wrong.

Fair point, and I agree with you there. 

although the issue is wider than one rogue establishment / user. I guess to take your line a fairer analogy would be if your issue was with a chain of pubs rather than an individual one, you would stop frequenting ALL pubs in that chain, but still attend other chains. 

I guess the problem is its harder to police - as the larger companies appear to have more issue, as they have a larger user base. 

I would also suggest that if its a boycott to raise awareness, rather than 'punish' the offending platforms, a wider impact would be  gained by including all platforms, even if the less offensives ones  present it as a 'it wont be tollerated on here' approach. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

That's the problem, the lines get somewhat blurred. 

Its not only Celebs, Corporations, sports / TV stars who can post on the likes of  twitter , insta , snapchat, tic-toc, but ordinary members of the public too,  and also the use of forums like this, facebook etc, there are just too many to name, let alone categorize. 

Spot on 🙌

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

Fair point, and I agree with you there. 

although the issue is wider than one rogue establishment / user. I guess to take your line a fairer analogy would be if your issue was with a chain of pubs rather than an individual one, you would stop frequenting ALL pubs in that chain, but still attend other chains. 

I guess the problem is its harder to police - as the larger companies appear to have more issue, as they have a larger user base. 

I would also suggest that if its a boycott to raise awareness, rather than 'punish' the offending platforms, a wider impact would be  gained by including all platforms, even if the less offensives ones  present it as a 'it wont be tollerated on here' approach. 

I get your point, but I still disagree. Depriving the smaller platforms or forums of traffic will probably play into the hands of the ones we're trying to 'punish', as the smaller ones are likely to feel the effects of a loss of advertising revenue more (assuming said revenue is generated by traffic, clicks and views).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

I get your point, but I still disagree. Depriving the smaller platforms or forums of traffic will probably play into the hands of the ones we're trying to 'punish', as the smaller ones are likely to feel the effects of a loss of advertising revenue more (assuming said revenue is generated by traffic, clicks and views).

So where do you draw the line ? Obviously if the companies dealt with it at source there would be no need for a boycott and the like. 

As ive said before one mans banter is another ones insults......... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Greavsy said:

So where do you draw the line ? Obviously if the companies dealt with it at source there would be no need for a boycott and the like. 

As ive said before one mans banter is another ones insults......... 

I draw the line at the companies who are perceived to be inactive. Archant, to the best of my knowledge, have not received such criticism so I don't see why we should punish them by boycotting the Pink Un.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess its down to the individual where their filter / compass is set, and their personal experience. 

For a demonstration though, it should be targeted at  all platforms, if not it becomes unmanageable (that said I agree I have nothing against Archant and this site)   

Edited by Greavsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

So are people going to boycott the pink un for the weekend?

Definite no from me.

where has that been said? Or are you just trying to provoke a reaction? again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a question.

So anyway, are people going to boycott the pink un for the weekend?

Edited by nutty nigel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like the one opening the thread? 

Are we likely to see less people on here over the weekend, the weekend we could finally get the title? 

So why is it a definate no from you NN  ?? do expand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because I will be updating Ray's Funds as usual.

So anyway will people boycotting the pink un for the weekend?

Edited by nutty nigel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, nutty nigel said:

Because I will be updating Ray's Funds as usual.

And to show support for our club, and others, that cannot wait? Just asking. 

Im sure as a one off for a good reason everyone will understand? 

Isn't that the point of the boycott? Im sure the people who have been victims on social media appreciate your support.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also got the impression that it's a boycott against the bigger boys, i.e. Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and perhaps Snapchat too. Since I personally have zilch to do with any of them, it doesn't affect me personally in any way. But the gesture can do no harm I feel. The two main areas of discrimination being targeted are racism & possibly to a lesser extent homophobia I would assume. And I think it's fair to say that the above companies could & should be doing a lot more to prevent their platforms being a vehicle for such abuse. Thumbs up from me.

On a separate note, without googling or using a reference book, does anyone know the origin of the verb "to boycott?" Little clue: there's an Irish element to the story and it's nothing to do with cricket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Greavsy said:

And to show support for our club, and others, that cannot wait? Just asking. 

Im sure as a one off for a good reason everyone will understand? 

Isn't that the point of the boycott? Im sure the people who have been victims on social media appreciate your support.  

No 

I've updated Ray's Funds every weekend for 14 seasons. Even through the pandemic when football wasn't even being played. I don't think our club, or anyone behind this idea would say that we should boycott things like Ray's Funds.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...