Eoghan Harris terminated

Jaysci20

Jaysci20 wrote: »

I just wonder why Twitter is not consistent in the application of its own policies on abuse. I mean if "backside in the air" gets banned, why not vile abusive comments toward a victim of an IRA rapist?

Why not indeed. There’s a thread for you to open on Twitter inconsistency.

Jaysci20

fvp4 wrote: »

Why not indeed. There’s a thread for you to open on Twitter inconsistency.

Open one if you like. It was a point Harris alluded to in his interview with McInerney. She responded "Ah, will you stop the nonsense"

Cilldara_2000

Jaysci20 wrote: »

I just wonder why Twitter is not consistent in the application of its own policies on abuse. I mean if "backside in the air" gets banned, why not vile abusive comments toward a victim of an IRA rapist?

Who said "backside on the air" got banned?

Jaysci20

Jaysci20 wrote: »

Open one if you like.

I don’t like. I’m not the one accusing Twitter of inconsistencies so why would I?

It was a point Harris alluded to in his interview with McInerney. She responded "Ah, will you stop the nonsense"

Will you stop the nonsense.

You are engaging in deflection.

By the way, I think Harris was saying that McInerney had done her research. He didn’t mention Twitter policy.

Jaysci20

Cilldara_2000 wrote: »

Who said "backside on the air" got banned?

This was one of the principal offending "abusive" tweets which was held up as an example of what Harris was tweeting. That on that new SF leadership turned a journalist on. It was an example of an abusive tweet held up by McInerney during her "filleting" of Harris

Fann Linn

Jaysci20 wrote: »

This was one of the principal offending "abusive" tweets which was held up as an example of what Harris was tweeting. That on that new SF leadership turned a journalist on. It was an example of an abusive tweet held up by McInerney during her "filleting" of Harris

He was already sacked before he gave that interview.

Furze99

Fann Linn wrote: »

These lads are great. Dragging Maria Cahill, Trump, SF, Jesus Mary & Joseph and the wee donkey and every other deflection into this to divert the thread.
Maybe it's time if a Mod could slowly divert us back on track as I thought the SF thread was over there>>>>

Maybe but all the usual Shinnerbots are here

Jaysci20

Jaysci20 wrote: »

This was one of the principal offending "abusive" tweets which was held up as an example of what Harris was tweeting. That on that new SF leadership turned a journalist on. It was an example of an abusive tweet held up by McInerney during her "filleting" of Harris

It’s not clear that that was why Twitter banned Pym. We don’t know why. As others have pointed out it’s probably the charges of defamation.

Fann Linn

Furze99 wrote: »

Maybe but all the usual Shinnerbots are here

And they're on gardening and gaa threads also. But I don't see them deflecting over there.

It's only Harris' buddies on here that are constantly dragging this thread down.

Cilldara_2000

Jaysci20 wrote: »

This was one of the principal offending "abusive" tweets which was held up as an example of what Harris was tweeting. That on that new SF leadership turned a journalist on. It was an example of an abusive tweet held up by McInerney during her "filleting" of Harris

This is not an answer to my question:

Cilldara_2000 wrote: »

Who said "backside on the air" got banned?

Which I asked in response to this:

Jaysci20 wrote: »

I just wonder why Twitter is not consistent in the application of its own policies on abuse. I mean if "backside in the air" gets banned, why not vile abusive comments toward a victim of an IRA rapist?

Want to take another go at it? Or is honest debate beyond you in this debate and you're just here for deflection?

McMurphy

Cilldara_2000 wrote: »

Who said "backside on the air" got banned?

It wasn't that comment that got the account banned, it was the breaking of Twitter rules that got the account banned, namely "manipulation and spamming".

Been a bad week or two for Ireland's partitionists and unionists, Arlene forced to move on, Aiken gone, Harris (and others will follow I reckon) outed as an online troll, who seemed to have a particular penchant for targeting women.

We could be in for a few interesting weeks.

jmcc

Think that Twitter banned or suspended the Harris sockpuppet accounts because they contravened Twitter's regulation on Social Media manipulation.

Regards...jmcc

FrancieBrady

McMurphy wrote: »

It wasn't that comment that got the account banned, it was the breaking of Twitter rules that got the account banned, namely "manipulation and spamming".

Been a bad week or two for Ireland's partitionists and unionists, Arlene forced to move on, Aiken gone, Harris (and others will follow I reckon) outed as an online troll, who seemed to have a particular penchant for targeting women.

We could be in for a few interesting weeks.

Yes, journalism, always keen to jump to the high moral ground will be forced to hold a mirror up to itself.
I personally suspect there is an unholy alliance of 'journalists' behind all this.

RandomViewer

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Yes, journalism, always keen to jump to the high moral ground will be forced to hold a mirror up to itself.
I personally suspect there is an unholy alliance of 'journalists' behind all this.

Harris wouldn't have the skills required and having seen him as a celebrity judge on TG4 would be dismissive of anything he doesn't know,

Rosita

HBC08 wrote: »

She has a high profile and is a public personality.
She's been on Twitter for 12 years and in that time has muted only 15 accounts.I think that indicates that what that account was posting about her was probably pretty bad.

Not questioning that. I'm just questioning the relevance of mentioning that at all. The interview wasn't about her. And if she wanted to make it about her then she could gave been specific and explained why she muted it. To refer to it in analagous terms already suggested it's like saying "I had a bad experience with an airline". Means nothing without a context. I'm sure she wasn't making it up but the idea (as some suggest) that he was somehow non-plussed by such a vague and woolly 'accusation' is naive. Harris has a hide like a rhinoceros.

Rosita

volchitsa wrote: »

Well no, what you mean is you don't know whether it's relevant or not.
.

No I don't mean that. I mean it was irrelevant. If S McInerney thought it was relevant she was wrong. She, like us all, will make errors in her job.

If she thought an unsubstantiated unspecified comment about who she "muted" on twitter was going to be make more impact on Harris than hitting an elephant with a pea-shooter she was very wrong. Without specifics it was utterly irrelevant. What was said? What was the context? Who else did she mute and why? Does she overreact? Did she overreact in that situation? So easy to argue against that.

Rosita

BQQ wrote: »

You've made this claim a number of times now.
She very clearly specified that she muted the account because of personalised abuse.

Grand. I missed that bit. What was said? Didn't realise she very clearly specified it.

'Personalised abuse' in the abstract means nothing as one person's personalised abuse will be grist to the mill for another. But I'm glad she specified it.

What did he say to her?

TheCitizen

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I actually googled that and read again about dunphy and Hume; I had forgotten. The piece I read was a fairly elegant attack on the independent in the early 90s.fairly normal says you.

Except it was in the Independent and written by the Editor. Alan English.

Clearly there is a new guard.

https://m.independent.ie/opinion/comment/letter-from-the-editor-john-hume-vindicated-by-the-hand-of-history-39434383.html

Excuses. Similar to what Dunphy said when challenged on it.

It was an uncertain period. Hume took a gamble for peace and the shysters at the Sunday Independent attacked him for gambling for Peace. Utter scumbags.

They should hang their heads in shame, and I liked Dunphy on the radio for his soccer and other analysis at times but for him and especially Harris et al it will be a stain on them.

Harris was a lunatic, sad that he had such influence over Irish print journalism for so long.

TheCitizen

volchitsa wrote: »

Nevertheless, Harris basically tried to scupper the peace process with his personal attacks on John Hume at a time when he needed people in the south to be behind him.

I'll never forgive him for that. Not many living journalists in Ireland have done anything so evil IMO.

Yep. He’s dirt. His legacy stinks.

RandomViewer

TheCitizen wrote: »

Excuses. Similar to what Dunphy said when challenged on it.

It was an uncertain period. Hume took a gamble for peace and the shysters at the Sunday Independent attacked him for gambling for Peace. Utter scumbags.

They should hang their heads in shame, and I liked Dunphy on the radio for his soccer and other analysis at times but for him and especially Harris et al it will be a stain on them.

Harris was a lunatic, sad that he had such influence over Irish print journalism for so long.

Has Bertie or Johnny made any comment on their former advisor? The guy from the presidential election he f###ed over as well

Jaysci20

What was his motivation for trying to scupper the Good Friday agreement? Let me guess - he saw it as legitimising terrorism?

TheCitizen

TheCitizen wrote: »

Excuses. Similar to what Dunphy said when challenged on it.

It was an uncertain period. Hume took a gamble for peace and the shysters at the Sunday Independent attacked him for gambling for Peace. Utter scumbags.

They should hang their heads in shame, and I liked Dunphy on the radio for his soccer and other analysis at times but for him and especially Harris et al it will be a stain on them.

Harris was a lunatic, sad that he had such influence over Irish print journalism for so long.

To be fair, in that link, Alan English was fairly critical of past management and decisions. He’s the guy who got rid of Harris so I expect he wants changes.

Rosita

Rosita wrote: »

Grand. I missed that bit. What was said? Didn't realise she very clearly specified it.

'Personalised abuse' in the abstract means nothing as one person's personalised abuse will be grist to the mill for another. But I'm glad she specified it.

What did he say to her?

We don’t know exactly. Why do you not believe her?

TheCitizen

RandomViewer wrote: »

Has Bertie or Johnny made any comment on their former advisor? The guy from the presidential election he f###ed over as well

Bertie should be quizzed on his promotion of the shyster Harris.

Bertie often appears now as an expert contributor on Northern Ireland discussion re Brexit etc. Bertie never gets a hard time in those pieces, treated as an elder statesmen. He did a good job re the GFA to be fair, but yes he should be quizzed re his relationship with Harris.

bmc58

Mad_maxx wrote: »

mad as a bag of squirrels

No not really.Just could only see one side of an argument.

TheCitizen

[Deleted User] wrote: »

To be fair, in that link, Alan English was fairly critical of past management and decisions. He’s the guy who got rid of Harris so I expect he wants changes.

Times have changed and the madness of Harris et al doesn’t wash these days anyway.

It was mealy mouthed stuff similar to the mealy mouthed stuff out of Jody Corcoran on the SIndo today. I didn’t read the full article, I wouldn’t pay for it but his first two paragraphs were basically “Eoghan had to go but he’s still my pal etc...”

Stomach churning, and sad that he still feels he has to suck up to the bully Harris.

Jaysci20

TheCitizen wrote: »

Bertie should be quizzed on his promotion of the shyster Harris.

Bertie often appears now as an expert contributor on Northern Ireland discussion re Brexit etc. Bertie never gets a hard time in those pieces, treated as an elder statesmen. He did a good job re the GFA to be fair, but yes he should be quizzed re his relationship with Harris.

Bertie was disgraced by the Mahon Tribunal and forced to resign as a result of its revelations. He should be nowhere near our airwaves, particularly those of RTE which the people of this country are forced to pay a license fee for.

I wonder if Harris ever examined the rise of SF and the left, and the disdain ordinary people held for events which bankrupted the nation

AndrewJRenko

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Interesting. What threats were you making?

This kind of thing

TheCitizen

Jaysci20 wrote: »

Bertie was disgraced by the Mahon Tribunal and forced to resign as a result of its revelations. He should be nowhere near our airwaves, particularly those of RTE which the people of this country are forced to pay a license fee for.

I wonder if Harris ever examined the rise of SF and the left, and the disdain ordinary people held for events which bankrupted the nation

Yep. Why would he do that, Bertie bought him off with a gig in the Seanaid.

TheCitizen

Jaysci20 wrote: »

Bertie was disgraced by the Mahon Tribunal and forced to resign as a result of its revelations. He should be nowhere near our airwaves, particularly those of RTE which the people of this country are forced to pay a license fee for.

I wonder if Harris ever examined the rise of SF and the left, and the disdain ordinary people held for events which bankrupted the nation

Yep. Totally forgotten about. Bertie I won it on the horses etc.

Harris and what he said at the start of the Peace Process will not be forgotten either. I and others will remind everyone of this charlatan when he gets platitudes when his day comes.

Bertie to be fair has some redeeming features, Harris et al has none.