pandarilla Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 Aye it's totally taken over the global MSM and not just a weirdo subsection of social media. Mainly Bristol based.You can't deny that this takes up vast swathes of the media narrative.The BBC news has something on trans rights every other week. You certainly can't pin it all on Campbell. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 (edited) 11 minutes ago, pandarilla said: You can't deny that this takes up vast swathes of the media narrative. The BBC news has something on trans rights every other week. You certainly can't pin it all on Campbell. Not on Campbell alone but it does seem to be mainly confined to the celebrity twitterati. Of course it's going to occasionally leak into the MSM with high profile people getting involved in a very niche issue, but it isn't remotely centre stage in the liberal left agenda. Edited March 28, 2019 by welshbairn 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 Not on Campbell alone but it does seem to be mainly confined to the celebrity twitterati. Of course it's going to occasionally leak into the MSM with high profile people getting involved in a very niche issue, but it isn't remotely centre stage in the liberal left agenda. This is the only social media account I have, and it's been clear to me that this issue has gained enormous coverage in the last few years. Tbf I'm still using the BBC news website (against all my better judgment), reading the guardian, and watching the daily show with Trevor Noah. Trans rights has become a mainstay in the identity politics revolution (I'm not sure that's the right word but it's certainly been a significant change in left wing politics). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 (edited) 13 minutes ago, pandarilla said: This is the only social media account I have, and it's been clear to me that this issue has gained enormous coverage in the last few years. Tbf I'm still using the BBC news website (against all my better judgment), reading the guardian, and watching the daily show with Trevor Noah. Trans rights has become a mainstay in the identity politics revolution (I'm not sure that's the right word but it's certainly been a significant change in left wing politics). I only notice it on here or when some celebrity is quoted on the issue. Maybe I'm living a sheltered life, the closest I've encountered it was when my girlfriend's work colleague appeared at lunch with a wig and said her name was Jenny instead of Dave. Fair do's. I stalk Twitter and Facebook but I'm not a member. Edited March 28, 2019 by welshbairn 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 I'm surprised that the people whose activism is limited to obsessively scanning social media are convinced that lefties are only talking about trans rights. Weird, that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
btb Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 When is the Kez vs Wings result due? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted April 4, 2019 Share Posted April 4, 2019 When is the Kez vs Wings result due?Within a month of the trial. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 Meanwhile, in the ranks of the not at all identity-obsessed liberal left: https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/joan-mcalpine-defies-bullies-in-sex-and-gender-dispute-1-4903317 The chair of a Holyrood committee is being targeted with abuse by trans rights activists for, err, not doing exactly what they want in a consultative process over the sex and gender questions in the next census. Scottish Green leader Patrick Harvie chooses to respond to this abuse by engaging in Old Firm levels of whataboutery, helpfully conflating McAlpine with 'anti-trans campaigners' in the process. https://twitter.com/patrickharvie/status/1115188387286323200 This dedication to a truly moronic brand of identity politics is fast making the Greens a total joke outfit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detournement Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 4 minutes ago, MixuFixit said: Seems a bit daft if you have to mark male or female then have another optional box to say not really. It's two completely different questions. One is for sex and one is for gender. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detournement Posted April 11, 2019 Share Posted April 11, 2019 (edited) If they have legally changed their gender and been issued with a new birth certificate they can mark down whatever is on their birth certificate for both questions. Edited April 11, 2019 by Detournement 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renton Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 https://wingsoverscotland.com/the-severed-baby/ Not a homophobe (based on the selected paragraphs of the judgement), but not getting paid damages. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin_Nevis Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Not the BBC's take [emoji38]https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-47963759 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renton Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 2 minutes ago, jupe1407 said: Not the BBC's take https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-47963759 Looks like a pretty 50-50 judgement to me: Dugdale is protected under fair comment, Campbell exonerated by the judge at least of being a homophobe on twitter. I suspect Campbell can emblazon that judgement on his website as a means to an end to protect his reputation. Dugdale's bank balance survives and she can continue on into the political wilderness. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 12 minutes ago, renton said: Looks like a pretty 50-50 judgement to me: Dugdale is protected under fair comment, Campbell exonerated by the judge at least of being a homophobe on twitter. I suspect Campbell can emblazon that judgement on his website as a means to an end to protect his reputation. Dugdale's bank balance survives and she can continue on into the political wilderness. That's a bit like Father Ted's "Not A Racist" slide show, is it not? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mastermind Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Unlucks Wings. Pleasing. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross. Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 (edited) 35 minutes ago, jupe1407 said: Not the BBC's take https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-47963759 Headline: Quote Kezia Dugdale wins Wings Over Scotland defamation case What they actually write: Quote In a written judgment, Sheriff Nigel Ross said Ms Dugdale was incorrect to imply that Mr Campbell is homophobic. But he said her article was protected under the principle of fair comment. Agree with the comment above, looks like both can claim it as a win, though both could be accused of having lost. ETA: Looks like the Sheriff is doing his best to enter the ongoing trans id fest: Quote But the sheriff said: "Mr Dugdale's article contained the necessary elements for a defence of fair comment. Edited April 17, 2019 by Ross. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 Judge taking the pish a bit at the end of the Herald's piece. Wonder what happens about legal costs? Quote The judge said Ms Dugdale's article was "accordingly defamatory of the pursuer", as it implied Mr Campbell is homophobic. However, he ruled that the MSP's comments were fair "because the content of the tweet formed a basis of fact for a rational belief that it was derogatory about homosexual people". He said Mr Campbell had suffered "no quantifiable financial or other loss as a result of the article", and suffered no loss of influence. "The value of any loss would have been quantified at £100," he added. https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/17580019.kezia-dugdale-wins-25k-defamation-case-against-wings-over-scotland/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renton Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Savage Henry said: That's a bit like Father Ted's "Not A Racist" slide show, is it not? In the end it'll almost certainly not change a single opinion on the man either way. Looking at twitter, it seems to be a case of if you don't like him you read the line 'Kez won' from the Daily record and pronounce him a homophobe anyway, if you do your probably underneath the first tweeter plastering parts of the Sheriff's judgement proclaiming him not. What I don't really get here is how the comment can be defamatory and fair comment. If the Sheriff had found that there was sufficient semantic ambiguity in the comment or past context in his actions for the comment to be construed as homophobic then that'd be fair comment, but he goes out of his way to suggest that this wasn't the case? If it is incorrect and defamatory as the judgement seems to imply, where is there fair comment? If, as the judge implies the statement is incorrect and/or defamatory then the fact that Dugdale may honestly believe it to be the reverse surely isn't much of a defence, particularly as the route to which she came to that conclusion is not necessarily a narrow appreciation of the language or context of the tweet but would also include any pre-existing emotive responses that Dugdale might have for someone who's been grinding at her reputation for years? Is the missing element here that Campbell seems to have suffered little in the way of tangible damage? Had he done so, would the sheriff have been forced to come down more one way or the other in terms of his judgement? It seems odd that anyone with a newspaper column could, tomorrow defame you and then hide behind fair comment even as a judge rules that such comment was not true... Edited April 17, 2019 by renton 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 1 minute ago, Ross. said: Agree with the comment above, looks like both can claim it as a win, though both could be accused of having lost. She clearly won the case, but sounds like each side will have to cover their own legal costs, so both lose. It was a frivolous case that Campbell would never have pursued if his fan club weren't paying for it. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted April 17, 2019 Share Posted April 17, 2019 4 minutes ago, renton said: In the end it'll almost certainly not change a single opinion on the man either way. Looking at twitter, it seems to be a case of if you don't like him you read the line 'Kez won' from the Daily record and pronounce him a homophobe anyway, if you do your probably underneath the first tweeter plastering parts of the Sheriff's judgement proclaiming him not. What I don't really get here is how the comment can be defamatory and fair comment. If the Sheriff had found that there was sufficient semantic ambiguity in the comment or past context in his actions for the comment to be construed as homophobic then that'd be fair comment, but he goes out of his way to suggest that this wasn't the case? If it is incorrect and defamatory as the judgement seems to imply, where is there fair comment? If, as the judge implies the statement is incorrect and/or defamatory then the fact that Dugdale may honestly believe it to be the reverse surely isn't much of a defence, particularly as the route to which she came to that conclusion is not necessarily a narrow appreciation of the language or context of the tweet but would also include any pre-existing emotive responses that Dugdale might have for someone who's been grinding at her reputation for years? Is the missing element here that Campbell seems to have suffered little in the way of tangible damage? Had he done so, would the sheriff have been forced to come down more one way or the other in terms of his judgement? It seems odd that anyone with a newspaper column could, tomorrow defame you and then hide behind fair comment even as a judge rules that such comment was not true... I thought he was saying that a reasonable person could interpret the tweet as homophobic even if it wasn't intended to be. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.