Social Media caused the suicide of a politician?

hyperborean

The Independent have reported that friends and associates of Shane McEntee are blaming social media for his death,

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/fallout-from-budget-and-cyber-abuse-troubled-him-3334469.html

Friends and associates of the late Minister of State Shane McEntee have claimed that "abuse" directed towards the Fine Gael TD on social media websites was a factor in his tragic death.

Now however sad and senseless suicide is, it seems that it is being used to attack social media more and more, there is a definite agenda lately.

Is it the old media in its last attack before it dies a deserved death or is it the politicians protecting their little cosy cartels from the scrutiny of the electorate?

Or both?

How long will social media keep its current unfettered freedoms if the 2 remaining behemoths of old Irish society go on the attack, will we see censorship , do we need censorship?

Who is protecting the interest of social media?

liammur

hyperborean wrote: »

The Independent have reported that friends and associates of Shane McEntee are blaming social media for his death,

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/fallout-from-budget-and-cyber-abuse-troubled-him-3334469.html



Now however sad and senseless suicide is, it seems that it is being used to attack social media more and more, there is a definite agenda lately.

Is it the old media in its last attack before it dies a deserved death or is it the politicians protecting their little cosy cartels from the scrutiny of the electorate?

Or both?

How long will social media keep its current unfettered freedoms if the 2 remaining behemoths of old Irish society go on the attack, will we see censorship , do we need censorship?

Who is protecting the interest of social media?

These radio phone-in shows are even worse imo.

JohnnyHatesYou

could be both yup, but it could also be neither couldn't it? or are you completely set on that one sided view?

Nodin

No offence to the man, but I never heard of him until his unfortunate end, so its hardly a massive phenomena.

tonedef

hyperborean wrote: »

How long will social media keep its current unfettered freedoms if the 2 remaining behemoths of old Irish society go on the attack, will we see censorship , do we need censorship?

No but what is needed, in my view, is some form of validation of a users identity on any social media site that's has the purpose of offering people of forum to share their view on politics, economics, etc....
If you feel strongly enough about your view to express them to the public online then why not put your name to it.

Take a look at the comments section on thejournal.ie or breakingnews.ie for an example of what I mean

liammur

Nodin wrote: »

No offence to the man, but I never heard of him until his unfortunate end, so its hardly a massive phenomena.

I didn't either until recently:

http://www.thejournal.ie/senator-mcentee-called-on-to-clarify-callous-comments-on-respite-care-grant-708894-Dec2012/

MINISTER OF STATE Shane McEntee has been called upon to clarify his “callous and crass” comments in relation to cuts to the respite care grant.
Today’s Sunday Times reports that the Fine Gael Minister commented on the controversial cut – saying that “you could stay in a top hotel for €700 a week” and that “people just have to get on with it”.
In response to the comments, Fianna Fáil Senator Thomas Byrne said: “Having listened to many carers at Friday’s protest outside Leinster House, none of them mentioned using the money to stay in a “top hotel”. Most use the money for the extra costs of caring.”
“The 20 per cent cut in the Respite Care Grant is arguably the most mean-spirited cut in the Budget. The 77,000 carers affected save the State a fortune by caring for their loved ones on a daily basis. They will now be down €6.50 a week – or €325 a year – as a result of this Budget,” said Byrne.
“I have spoken to a number of carers over the past few weeks and months who are already under severe pressure as it is. I know they too would expect Minister McEntee to clarify his comments immediately.”

hyperborean

tonedef wrote: »

No but what is needed, in my view, is some form of validation of a users identity on any social media site that's has the purpose of offering people of forum to share their view on politics, economics, etc....
If you feel strongly enough about your view to express them to the public online then why not put your name to it.

Take a look at the comments section on thejournal.ie or breakingnews.ie for an example of what I mean

I get the validation argument and could give some examples of were it would prove positive but there are some strong arguments for anonymity as the powers that be can quickly change the goalposts and then validation becomes a tool for stopping dissension, stifling any useful debate as people are afraid to challenge...

Look at the propaganda in this article, these guys (politicians and media) are comfortable using suicide to drive public opinion towards a point were they might get to put stop to anyone questioning their holy word so attacking a member/s of social media who might question their cartels would be no problem, give them your names and it would be very simple as we all have skeletons.

Suicide is never the fault of "one thing". It's always a multitude of reasons.

liammur

Deleted User wrote: »

Suicide is never the fault of "one thing". It's always a multitude of reasons.

I'm not sure about that. Look at the case in the UK involving the Aussie djs and the nurse, that seemed to be 1 thing, and 1 thing only - the hoax call.

Drumpot

liammur wrote: »

I'm not sure about that. Look at the case in the UK involving the Aussie djs and the nurse, that seemed to be 1 thing, and 1 thing only - the hoax call.

Do you think that had the DJs played the prank on anybody else the person at the receiving end would of killed themself ?

The point is that a person who commits suicide would more then likely have other internal struggles or other issues that they have yet to resolve.

In the instance of a politician/minister committing suicide, I dont believe the media or discussional forums can be blamed. I think its awful that Mr McEntee took his life, but every politician knows what they are getting into when they get into politics and its an ugly game.

My sympathies are with his family and friends, but I dont believe that the criticisms he has received for the carers issue was anything more then the straw that broke the camels back as opposed to it being the cause . .

Paddy De Plasterer

Imagine the Sindo talking about bullying, it is a prime example of that. Look at antics of John Drennan, Jody Corcoran, Brendan O Connor and others, they specialise in personal abuse and name calling. Talk of pot calling kettle black. Sindo is full of supermarket ads, must be hard up.

leggo

I'm not sure if I'd specifically blame social media, that's just a medium, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least if abuse from the public led to a politician committing suicide.

I've told this story here before, but I remember encountering Brian Lenihan at the height of it while working security in a venue. He was there to see his daughter (I believe) perform. Upon leaving, though, he was cornered by what I can only call a mob of angry people yelling abuse at him. Say what you want about Lenihan (and I'm by no means a FF-sympathiser or someone who considers anyone who dies a saint), but all I saw then was a man who wanted one nice night with the family (something we all deserve, regardless of what our job is) and had it destroyed, while damn close to being physically attacked, because people didn't like his political policies. I couldn't but sympathise, regardless of how much I disagreed with his professional views.

I encourage political participation, but I also feel we have to learn that there's a right and wrong way to participate. Using public figures as figureheads that we see ourselves as entitled to vent at and bully isn't the right way. It also doesn't work: would you be more inclined to listen to the educated person who can intelligently and rationally discuss an issue in full with you, or the foaming-at-the-mouth, enraged type who screams half-truths in your face before trying to deck you?

thebman

I think it is a very poor form for them to act like they know why he did it.

He could have done it for any reason.

If I was to speculate, I'd say more likely that real people contacting by phone etc... About that grant with real stories about how it was going to effect them would cause you to get that upset, not some random person online with no face.

If it was that, you think they'd tell us? No much easier to scapegoat online media. It was the same with fox news blaming computer games for the school getting attacked. They later found out that it was his brother that played the games, not him.

Unless the man left a note then nobody knows, that is the truth.

Sierra Oscar

Very naive and cynical for the Sindo to assume that one simple issue drove this man to commit suicide. Those familiar with people who have taken their own life know that a multitude of factors can contribute to someone wanting to harm themselves. We don't know at this time what this man was thinking, and perhaps we may never know, and it is cynical for the Sindo to assume that social media was the sole factor in bringing about this awful tragedy. Now is not the time to push a particular agenda - and the media and fellow TD's should recognise that.

liammur

Drumpot wrote: »

Do you think that had the DJs played the prank on anybody else the person at the receiving end would of killed themself ?

The point is that a person who commits suicide would more then likely have other internal struggles or other issues that they have yet to resolve.

In the instance of a politician/minister committing suicide, I dont believe the media or discussional forums can be blamed. I think its awful that Mr McEntee took his life, but every politician knows what they are getting into when they get into politics and its an ugly game.

My sympathies are with his family and friends, but I dont believe that the criticisms he has received for the carers issue was anything more then the straw that broke the camels back as opposed to it being the cause . .

I don't honestly know, some probably would, others no. But I feel for all involved in these horrible instances.

kensutz

liammur wrote: »

I'm not sure about that. Look at the case in the UK involving the Aussie djs and the nurse, that seemed to be 1 thing, and 1 thing only - the hoax call.

Apparently she made 2 attempts to end her life before finally doing it.

expectationlost

leggo wrote: »

I'm not sure if I'd specifically blame social media, that's just a medium, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least if abuse from the public led to a politician committing suicide.

I've told this story here before, but I remember encountering Brian Lenihan at the height of it while working security in a venue. He was there to see his daughter (I believe) perform. Upon leaving, though, he was cornered by what I can only call a mob of angry people yelling abuse at him. Say what you want about Lenihan (and I'm by no means a FF-sympathiser or someone who considers anyone who dies a saint), but all I saw then was a man who wanted one nice night with the family (something we all deserve, regardless of what our job is) and had it destroyed, while damn close to being physically attacked, because people didn't like his political policies. I couldn't but sympathise, regardless of how much I disagreed with his professional views.

i think you're underestimating what lenihan did to this country

leggo

expectationlost wrote: »

i think you're underestimating what lenihan did to this country

I think you're arguing that poor economic policy means that someone should be given an amount of abuse that could possibly drive them to suicide. Wow...

NIMAN

kensutz wrote: »

Apparently she made 2 attempts to end her life before finally doing it.

Proof if ever it was needed to never believe the first few accounts of a media story.

The hospital also came out and said they had been defending her to the hilt over the incident, yet one of the 3 suicide notes she left attacked her employers for how they had treated her after it had happened.

This TD didn't kill himself simply because he was getting a bit of grief on Twitter or Facebook, there has to be underlying issues in his life (or at least I would hope so, cos to kill yourself over remarks on Twitter all sounds rather trivial).

The Waltzing Consumer

Paddy De Plasterer wrote: »

Imagine the Sindo talking about bullying, it is a prime example of that. Look at antics of John Drennan, Jody Corcoran, Brendan O Connor and others, they specialise in personal abuse and name calling. Talk of pot calling kettle black. Sindo is full of supermarket ads, must be hard up.

This is exactly my thoughts, not only the Sindo, but the Independent in general. The Independent group have written here and in the past few weeks about online abuse of children, cases of suicide regarding online bullying and now this most recent article placing some blame on social media.

So they and the quoted FG TD are very concerned about things written that can be frenzied and have a negative impact on TDs and families of TDs.

Interesting.
1) Independent run a story
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/ceann-comhairle-tells-ming-and-mick-dress-to-impress-in-the-dail-3317480.html
With the headline:
Ceann Comhairle tells Ming and Mick: 'Dress to impress' in the Dail

2) http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/flanagans-children-teased-over-barretts-dress-comments-576911.html
Luke Flannigan is hecked and interrupted by Government benches when raising his concerns about his children being teased regarding the Independent article.

Sean Barrett also points out:
""Contrary to a misleading headline and article in today’s Irish Independent, the Ceann Comhairle Sean Barrett TD did not refer to any individual member of the Dáil when asked about a possible Dáil dress code," the statement from the Ceann Comhairle's office read."

3) http://www.independent.ie/national-news/ming-complains-his-children-are-being-teased-about-dress-row-3318492.html
The Independent avoid talking about the misleading headline. There is no apology, no acknowledgment, no thinking about the welfare of families and children in the piece which was completely created by the newspaper themselves.

Short memories...

starviewadams

When you decide to become a T.D. you would have to be awfully naive to think that you won't be subject to verbal abuse on occasion,both in the media and in person.Little sympathy for the likes of McEntee or Brian Lenihan in that regard.Well remunerated for the 'abuse' they may or may not have received.

leggo

starviewadams wrote: »

When you decide to become a T.D. you would have to be awfully naive to think that you won't be subject to verbal abuse on occasion,both in the media and in person.Little sympathy for the likes of McEntee or Brian Lenihan in that regard.Well remunerated for the 'abuse' they may or may not have received.

And this attitude is why politics doesn't work in Ireland. We speak up by calling Liveline, by giving out on Facebook, Twitter, boards etc, but then don't actually participate fully where it actually matters. We think we ARE participating by just yelling mindless abuse in a blind rage.

So what happens? We elect people we're not happy with, then disparage and undermine them for the duration of their term, then elect people we're not happy with again, etc...

kraggy

expectationlost wrote: »

i think you're underestimating what lenihan did to this country

He didn't set out to wreck the country. To me he seemed an honest man who got it wrong.

Bare in mind also that he was advised by senior civil servants and economists and also that he was sold the proverbial pup by the heads of the banks at the time.

I doubt he ever imagined that the guarantee would be called in to the extent that it has been. Also, Fine Gael backed it at the time did they not.

The Waltzing Consumer

leggo wrote: »

And this attitude is why politics doesn't work in Ireland. We speak up by calling Liveline, by giving out on Facebook, Twitter, boards etc, but then don't actually participate fully where it actually matters. We think we ARE participating by just yelling mindless abuse in a blind rage.

So what happens? We elect people we're not happy with, then disparage and undermine them for the duration of their term, then elect people we're not happy with again, etc...

Yeah that's the public sphere, a public discourse on any issue which is fundamental to our society.

I don't see how you are linking the public sphere to election results and trends and if there is some trend, do you have any sources for that?

NIMAN

leggo wrote: »

So what happens? We elect people we're not happy with, then disparage and undermine them for the duration of their term, then elect people we're not happy with again, etc...

Well if they would stop lying to us when canvassing then we wouldn't vote for them.

Is it our fault they all turn into blind-faced liars the minute they get power?

leggo

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

Yeah that's the public sphere, a public discourse on any issue which is fundamental to our society.

I don't see how you are linking the public sphere to election results and trends and if there is some trend, do you have any sources for that?

Yeah, easily. We re-elected Bertie-led FF while he was being grilled in the Mahon Tribunal. That ended well...

We also elected Fine Gael last year, with their manifesto essentially being "We're anti-Fianna Fail", despite their economic policies being near identical to FF's. Anyone who bothered to look could see that, I voted for everyone on the ballot except for FF and FG personally, so you can't say that they were liars and misled people either. People just chose not to look closely enough. They were too busy moaning about how bad FF were...

That's two for two, a 100% hit rate, in past General Elections. Would you like me to go on?

expectationlost

leggo wrote: »

I think you're arguing that poor economic policy means that someone should be given an amount of abuse that could possibly drive them to suicide. Wow...

i was talking about lenihan, leggo!

leggo

expectationlost wrote: »

i was talking about lenihan, leggo!

I know, and if you read my post, you'll see that I was using Lenihan to illustrate how we abuse our politicians and that there is a right and wrong way to participate. So it's entirely plausible that this level of abuse could lead to someone's suicide.

To disagree with that is to argue that it is right to abuse a person to this level. You said that I underestimated the damage Lenihan did, thereby implying that he was entirely deserved of said abuse. Thereby people have a right to abuse people regardless of consequences.

The Waltzing Consumer

leggo wrote: »

Yeah, easily. We re-elected Bertie-led FF while he was being grilled in the Mahon Tribunal. That ended well...

We also elected Fine Gael last year, with their manifesto essentially being "We're anti-Fianna Fail", despite their economic policies being near identical to FF's. Anyone who bothered to look could see that, I voted for everyone on the ballot except for FF and FG personally, so you can't say that they were liars and misled people either. People just chose not to look closely enough. They were too busy moaning about how bad FF were...

That's two for two, a 100% hit rate, in past General Elections. Would you like me to go on?

No, I can see the point you are making but I don't see what the public sphere has to do with those results?

Take boards for example, I would think it would have a lot more posting anti-Government then pro-Government posters, so that would go against the premise of your argument right?

expectationlost

leggo wrote: »

I know, and if you read my post, you'll see that I was using Lenihan to illustrate how we abuse our politicians and that there is a right and wrong way to participate. So it's entirely plausible that this level of abuse could lead to someone's suicide.

To disagree with that is to argue that it is right to abuse a person to this level. You said that I underestimated the damage Lenihan did, thereby implying that he was entirely deserved of said abuse. Thereby people have a right to abuse people regardless of consequences.

becuase you think economic policy can't be abuse, can't be violent?

BlaasForRafa

liammur wrote: »

I'm not sure about that. Look at the case in the UK involving the Aussie djs and the nurse, that seemed to be 1 thing, and 1 thing only - the hoax call.

Apparently she had tried to kill herself months before the radio prank occurred http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/2012/12/23/15/28/radio-hoax-nurse-tried-to-commit-suicide-before

The Indian-born nurse was admitted to Mangalore hospital for a depressive disorder when she visited her family in December 2011, the unnamed relative said.

According to Indian media reports, the 46-year-old mother-of-two had tried to kill herself at the time and made a second attempt nine days later.

The media generally likes to blame one thing for something happening, the fact that a number of issues may be troubling a person at the same time is usually dismissed because that doesn't make for a good headline "Social media killed politician" makes for a better headline than "minister prone to depression, affected by recent tragedies commits suicide"

NIMAN

NIMAN wrote: »

Proof if ever it was needed to never believe the first few accounts of a media story.

The hospital also came out and said they had been defending her to the hilt over the incident, yet one of the 3 suicide notes she left attacked her employers for how they had treated her after it had happened.

This TD didn't kill himself simply because he was getting a bit of grief on Twitter or Facebook, there has to be underlying issues in his life (or at least I would hope so, cos to kill yourself over remarks on Twitter all sounds rather trivial).

Exactly. Its the exact same as these young girls who are posting images up on websites or doing other things to encourage remarks about them, the media blame these websites but there are clearly deeper issues at play that seem to be ignored.

leggo

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

No, I can see the point you are making but I don't see what the public sphere has to do with those results?

Take boards for example, I would think it would have a lot more posting anti-Government then pro-Government posters, so that would go against the premise of your argument right?

Well on that basis, then if there was an election tomorrow Fine Gael and Labour would have to be re-elected to prove me right. And, let's face it, Fianna Fáil probably wouldn't get elected, would they? Fine Gael and Labour would probably get enough seats for a majority and would form a coalition. So that actually proves my argument as spot on.

In terms of how the public sphere differed from election results: in 2007, the question was whether we'd re-elect Bertie despite the wheels coming off his term and signs of his corruption rearing their ugly head. We had a feeling he was corrupt, we'd mock him in the media and in the pub, but then we'd give them our number one. And I've already explained how our anti-FF bias in 2011 led us to not examine FG closely enough to realise that we were potentially electing a party not that far in economic ideology from FF.

Whereas, in a more politically-astute country (and, to be fair, these countries tend to be this way because of necessity, i.e. their government trying to kill them or the likes), there'd be revolutions, new political parties springing up and winning polls etc. In Ireland, we have our rant (usually without taking into account the full facts or scale of the problems at hand), a token, one-day protest if things are REALLY serious, and think we've done our bit.

To tie this back to my original point: this is all the wrong way to participate. This is what the country needs to learn if we are to progress. We are still a democracy, so in theory we're in control of our own destiny. But it's our own apathy that makes said democracy ineffective.

liammur

kensutz wrote: »

Apparently she made 2 attempts to end her life before finally doing it.

Well if she did, they should lay off the djs in question.

tayto lover

leggo wrote: »

And this attitude is why politics doesn't work in Ireland. We speak up by calling Liveline, by giving out on Facebook, Twitter, boards etc, but then don't actually participate fully where it actually matters. We think we ARE participating by just yelling mindless abuse in a blind rage.

So what happens? We elect people we're not happy with, then disparage and undermine them for the duration of their term, then elect people we're not happy with again, etc...

To a certain degree you are right BUT this crowd were elected on a tissue of lies. Remember the 5 Point Plan, the no hospital closures, the no rise in student fees etc etc.

Maybe Mr McEntee just couldn't live with the policies of his Govt as opposed to the great and noble promises they made. This is just as likely to have made him take the action he did as the abuse on social media sites.

efb

People should release that they dont have a carte blanche to say what every they want, anonymously on the internet.

bradlente

liammur wrote: »

Well if she did, they should lay off the djs in question.

Why?

Never mind,I mistook lay off for sack.

leggo

tayto lover wrote: »

To a certain degree you are right BUT this crowd were elected on a tissue of lies. Remember the 5 Point Plan, the no hospital closures, the no rise in student fees etc etc.

Maybe Mr McEntee just couldn't live with the policies of his party as opposed to the great and noble promises they made. This is just as likely to have made him take the action he did as the abuse on social media sites.

We're in danger of veering very much off-topic into a generic FG-bashing thread, but if you couldn't spot that they couldn't fulfill their promises, then that's your own fault. I did: as I said, I voted for all but FF and FG. So if I did then why didn't everyone else?

It doesn't take an inside source or an in-depth, nuanced understanding of politics to understand that there's a good chance that not all pre-election promises will be carried out. It takes a very basic level of political knowledge to be able to read between the lines: instead you look at who's promises match up with your belief of what direction we need to move in and what capacity they have for bringing about such a change.

So it's on US as a public for being naive enough to believe them. If you voted FG, then it's on YOU for not educating yourself enough to understand all of the above. I voted FF in 2007: it's MY fault that they were in a position to make decisions as piss-poor as the bank guarantee and subsequent budgets. I had to accept that, learn from it and not make the same mistake again.

Again, don't be the person that moans AFTER the fact. Know enough that you make the right decision when your chance to participate relevantly comes around.

tayto lover

leggo wrote: »

We're in danger of veering very much off-topic into a generic FG-bashing thread, but if you couldn't spot that they couldn't fulfill their promises, then that's your own fault. I did: as I said, I voted for all but FF and FG. So if I did then why didn't everyone else?

It doesn't take an inside source or an in-depth, nuanced understanding of politics to understand that there's a good chance that not all pre-election promises will be carried out. It takes a very basic level of political knowledge to be able to read between the lines: instead you look at who's promises match up with your belief of what direction we need to move in and what capacity they have for bringing about such a change.

So it's on US as a public for being naive enough to believe them. If you voted FG, then it's on YOU for not educating yourself enough to understand all of the above. I voted FF in 2007: it's MY fault that they were in a position to make decisions as piss-poor as the bank guarantee and subsequent budgets. I had to accept that, learn from it and not make the same mistake again.

Again, don't be the person that moans AFTER the fact. Know enough that you make the right decision when your chance to participate relevantly comes around.

I don't care who you voted for and it doesn't matter who I voted for either. The fact is that promises were made by his party and broken and it is likely that this is the cause of any abuse he received. Obviously many voters were fooled and felt that it was appropriate to abuse Mr McEntee on social media as a result.
Again it was just as likely that the broken policies of his own party drove him over the top. The whole lying thing might have effected him badly. We will never know unless he left a note and it's made public.

eric hoone

tayto lover wrote: »

I don't care who you voted for and it doesn't matter who I voted for either. The fact is that promises were made by his party and broken and it is likely that this is the cause of any abuse he received. Obviously many voters were fooled and felt that it was appropriate to abuse Mr McEntee on social media as a result.
Again it was just as likely that the broken policies of his own party drove him over the top. The whole lying thing might have effected him badly. We will never know unless he left a note and it's made public.

Inequality is making martyrs of growing numbers of Irish people I think we could have an Irish spring this year, Joe Duffy can only take so many calls

leggo

tayto lover wrote: »

I don't care who you voted for and it doesn't matter who I voted for either. The fact is that promises were made by his party and broken and it is likely that this is the cause of any abuse he received. Obviously many voters were fooled and felt that it was appropriate to abuse Mr McEntee on social media as a result.
Again it was just as likely that the broken policies of his own party drove him over the top. The whole lying thing might have effected him badly. We will never know unless he left a note and it's made public.

And there lies our problem in a nutshell: you 'don't care' who voted for who. You don't want to be held accountable for your own political naivety. You then go onto peddle your own agenda and vaguely tie it into speculation as to why this man committed suicide.

The reality is: ALL that matters is how we voted. What doesn't matter is this little rant on boards. But, god help us, you want to have that rant and you'll have it in spite of all common sense. Do you not see that this is exactly what I'm talking about? Keep typing, by all means, every word is solidifying my point.

Then you probably won't learn from the past, because you're not even entertaining the notion that you might have been politically naive, so unfortunately you'll be doomed to repeat that same mistake at some stage in the future (probably when a political party gives you a pre-election spiel that you love and, therefore, take as absolute gospel). The cycle continues...

tayto lover

leggo wrote: »

And there lies our problem in a nutshell: you 'don't care' who voted for who. You don't want to be held accountable for your own political naivety. You then go onto peddle your own agenda and vaguely tie it into speculation as to why this man committed suicide.

The reality is: ALL that matters is how we voted. What doesn't matter is this little rant on boards. But, god help us, you want to have that rant and you'll have it in spite of all common sense. Do you not see that this is exactly what I'm talking about? Keep typing, by all means, every word is solidifying my point.

Then you probably won't learn from the past, because you're not even entertaining the notion that you might have been politically naive, so unfortunately you'll be doomed to repeat that same mistake at some stage in the future (probably when a political party gives you a pre-election spiel that you love and, therefore, take as absolute gospel). The cycle continues...

What a silly rant.
In every election there are people voting who are politically naive. In every pub there is political debate by these same people. You are probably one of the politically naive yourself. Keep typing though because you are proving my point all the time. Continue to type loads but say nothing. Maybe you would address the points made.

leggo

I'm actually saying a lot, mate, though it appears that information doesn't get into your head unless it's delivered in the form of a 5-point plan.

tayto lover wrote: »

In every election there are people voting who are politically naive. In every pub there is political debate by these same people. You are probably one of the politically naive yourself.

I agree. But is this some kind of excuse or admission here? "Yeah well, I might have been naive, but so are the people in my local pub!"

And is that acceptable? In every pub these days, there are also people who want change. Not even the millionaires of this country want things to stay the same: they can't earn more money if people are too broke to spend their money with them.

If people want change, then they're going to have to learn how to actually affect change.

And it's very simple: not through moaning about things that affect them, then not actually doing anything about it. That changes nothing. Educating yourself on the issues, then making educated decisions, being pro-active and thinking outside the box instead of being lazy, moaning and accepting our lot begrudgingly. We could be a country to be proud of again if we only got pro-active about our plight and started making inroads to really changing things. But harassing a junior minister on Facebook and Twitter until he's had enough isn't exactly pro-active, is it?

Conmaicne Mara

tonedef wrote: »

No but what is needed, in my view, is some form of validation of a users identity on any social media site that's has the purpose of offering people of forum to share their view on politics, economics, etc....
If you feel strongly enough about your view to express them to the public online then why not put your name to it.

Take a look at the comments section on thejournal.ie or breakingnews.ie for an example of what I mean

Oh but there already.

I posted information on a British site relating to a murder. My username there had a vague (very) similarity to details of the murderer. I had two Gardaí from the other side of the county knock on my door one Saturday morning wanting to interview me. Which was fine as I was helping out by putting the info out there, but it was an eye opener.

If you post something online, and the authorities, or even a "wronged" individual with the know how of the process or a solicitor who knows, you'll find yourself in very hot water very fast.

I wouldn't go as far as saying there's no anonymity online, but I think the technical know how of how to achieve it is limited to a very small number of people and out of reach of the average internet user.

(edit: Slightly misread your post! Apologies).

ednwireland

sounds to me like he shouldn't have been a politician

tayto lover

leggo wrote: »

I'm actually saying a lot, mate, though it appears that information doesn't get into your head unless it's delivered in the form of a 5-point plan.



I agree. But is this some kind of excuse or admission here? "Yeah well, I might have been naive, but so are the people in my local pub!"

And is that acceptable? In every pub these days, there are also people who want change. Not even the millionaires of this country want things to stay the same: they can't earn more money if people are too broke to spend their money with them.

If people want change, then they're going to have to learn how to actually affect change.

And it's very simple: not through moaning about things that affect them, then not actually doing anything about it. That changes nothing. Educating yourself on the issues, then making educated decisions, being pro-active and thinking outside the box instead of being lazy, moaning and accepting our lot begrudgingly. We could be a country to be proud of again if we only got pro-active about our plight and started making inroads to really changing things. But harassing a junior minister on Facebook and Twitter until he's had enough isn't exactly pro-active, is it?

It has been said already that there is no evidence that he committed suicide due to being harassed on social media. It is merely a suggestion by some of his friends. There may be other reasons as there are usually more than one.

Again, maybe he felt bad about his party's reneging on it's promises, maybe he was suffering from depression. We will have to wait for the Coroner's Court and maybe we will find out more.

PS
There have been over 600 suicides in 2012 and many as a result of Govt policies too I fear but I couldn't say for certain.

M three

So Shane mcentee's death is being spun as the electorates fault?
What a load of nonsense. Politicians in this country are paid serious amounts of money for doing what many would rightly say is a pretty shoddy job.
His death is another attempt to further silence any level of criticism of politicians by an already hobbled media.
Just look at the largest broadcaster in the state, rte, they're little more than the PR wing of whatever useless government we have at the time

leggo

@tayto lover:
You're now quoting me and then arguing against points that I'm not making. I simply said that it wasn't pro-active to abuse TDs on Facebook and Twitter and you come back with this stat:

tayto lover wrote: »

There have been over 600 suicides in 2012 and many as a result of Govt policies too I fear but I couldn't say for certain.

What are you talking about? What's your actual point now? "A lot of people commit suicide, why should we care about this one?" or what? Do you even know what you're trying to say anymore?

As far as this debate goes, you're borderline incoherent. You don't know what you're actually arguing against, but damnit you want to keep arguing anyway. Just...stop. I've made my point, and you continue to not make any actual, coherent points, so lets leave it to the rest to discuss, shall we? Thanks.

tayto lover

leggo wrote: »

@tayto lover:
You're now quoting me and then arguing against points that I'm not making. I simply said that it wasn't pro-active to abuse TDs on Facebook and Twitter and you come back with this stat:



What are you talking about? What's your actual point now? "A lot of people commit suicide, why should we care about this one?" or what? Do you even know what you're trying to say anymore?

As far as this debate goes, you're borderline incoherent. You don't know what you're actually arguing against, but damnit you want to keep arguing anyway. Just...stop. I've made my point, and you continue to not make any actual, coherent points, so lets leave it to the rest to discuss, shall we? Thanks.

Just answer the simple questions and stop bladdering.
Do you think there have been suicides because of Government policy?
Do you think it possible that this man took his life because of his Govt's broken promises as this might have effected him?
A yes or no will suffice. Thanks

leggo

No, I'm not helping you resurrect your weird, little argument that Shane McEntee killed himself because of broken, pre-election promises by the government (which, conveniently, is specifically your own main problem with the government; pre-election promises aren't even discussed in the media these days).

You're trying to trivialise a man's suicide to suit your own agenda. And no amount of Vincent Browne-like, "Just answer the damn question!" posturing is going to make me engage you on it. You're talking ****e and I'm calling it for what it is. Now stop.

Qualitymark

Perhaps this isn't the time to talk about this?

However, since it's on the table... The Indo is referring to 'vile' comments on social media. Apparently these were in response to comments the late Mr McEntee made, including one where he said in relation to the controversial cut in respite care grants that "you could stay in a top hotel for €700 a week" and said "people just have to get on with it". http://www.build.ie/national_news.asp?newsid=155456

I saw no comments; I didn't know of or hear of Mr McEntee until yesterday's tragedy. I would suspect that he may have had other issues.

I feel so sorry for his family, facing this terrible blow at Christmas, and every Christmas to come remembering it.