An absent Trump “wins” on social media

Not sure if “winning” social media counts for much, but it does show that the mindshare is with Trump, and even a formal Fox Republican presidential candidate debate doesn’t have sufficient momentum to change the Trump Juggernaut.

Donald Trump was the big winner across social media during the seventh Republican presidential debate – despite the fact that he was not even there.

Trump was the most searched-for candidate on Google during the debate, according to data supplied by the search engine, which co-sponsored the event with Fox News.

Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson and former Florida Governor Jeb Bush also gained traction on Google.

Trump dominated Twitter mentions among all candidates during the debate, according to Brandwatch, a social media monitoring company.

The billionaire businessman received roughly 130,000 Twitter mentions during the debate, according to Brandwatch. This marked a roughly 40,000-tweet decline from the previous GOP debate – which he attended.   Read more »

Twitter’s captains are fleeing the sinking ship



Twitter was always an aberration to me.  Something that shouldn’t have worked.  But somehow it did, only to reach its final conclusion: that it isn’t an effective platform for anything.

Four senior Twitter executives are leaving the media company, CEO Jack Dorsey has tweeted.

It’s the biggest leadership changes since Dorsey returned as chief executive as he struggles to revive the company’s growth.

Media head Katie Jacobs Stanton, product head Kevin Weil, the head of the engineering division, Alex Roetter, and HR head Brian “Skip” Schipper will all leave the company, he said.

This is a clear signal for anyone else working there to get the CV polished up, especially before “worked at Twitter” hasn’t quite become the negative it will be.   Read more »


Twitter’s death will be by lawsuit


In 2009 Twitter was sued by an NFL sports coach who was annoyed at a spoof account mocking him. As a result they changed their operation and their rules.

Since then there have been other cases, some legal and others very public, such as GamerGate, attacks on women in the UK and general bullying. All the issues have resulted in a tightening of the rules.

In April 2015 they changed the rules again, this time with a focus on the promotion of terrorism:

By April, in another page separate from the Rules, the company also prohibited “threatening or promoting terrorism,” as well as “promot[ing] violence against others… on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, age, or disability.”

Twitter wasn’t using the term “hate speech,” but the company had effectively banned hate speech.

When asked for comment, a Twitter spokesperson contested this characterization, saying the company does not prohibit hate speech. “‘Hateful conduct’ differs from ‘hate speech’ in that the latter focuses on words. It’s the incitement to violence that we’re prohibiting. Offensive content and controversial viewpoints are still permitted on Twitter.”

Twitter is correct in that their definition of “hateful conduct” does not span quite as broadly as the hate speech prohibited in many European jurisdictions. But given that a viewpoint-based restriction on inciting speech is something that’s alien to American law, and the “hateful conduct” classification looks just like a subset of hate speech, it seems a bit like splitting hairs here.

No doubt there were questions around the language in the rest of the April update. By August, the company had reformulated the phrasing to clarify that it definitely included indirect threats, marking a massive departure from the original rules set out in 2009, which had explicitly limited the prohibition on threats to “direct” and “specific” threats.

Indeed, the new ban on indirect threats contradicted the Rules page, which used the “direct, specific threats” phrasing it had inherited from 2009. But other support pages clarified that Twitter prohibited not only hate speech and indirect threats, but also the “incitement” of harassment—speech that wasn’t a threat per se, but was intended to result in threats regardless.

Read more »

Why didn’t she just slap the old trout in the face?

Photo/ NZ Herald

Photo/ NZ Herald

Forget social media, there is a far better way to deal with obnoxious busy-bodies…a slap in face usually does the trick.

A storm has erupted on social media after yet another example of a woman being berated by a stranger for breastfeeding in public has emerged.

Deijah Cook, 21, has claimed she was publicly shamed by a woman for feeding her three month old son, Coby, in a Tauranga supermarket on January 7.

“My son had been crying for a good 10 minutes in there and I was just trying to hurry up and get out the other end so I wouldn’t have to feed him in the supermarket and then I just couldn’t listen to him crying anymore,” she said.    Read more »

What a great idea, perhaps we could try this here to solve the deadbeat parent problem


In 2013 New Zealand deadbeat parents owed more than $2.8 billion in unpaid child support payments.

Despite law changes it doesn’t appear there is much being done to recover this from deadbeat parents.

Perhaps Arizona has a solution for us to emulate: they have acted to publicly shame dead beat parents.

Deadbeat dads in Arizona, beware. Your mug could be plastered all over social media for the world to see.

Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey this week launched a campaign to crack down on “the worst of the worst” parents who are ignoring child support payments, posting their names and photos to Twitter and Facebook. The hope is that the public shaming will make some of them pay up and give other dads (and moms) second thoughts about evading child support.   Read more »

Twitter in its desperate death throes


Twitter is considering giving even more space to hateful, nasty, mostly left-wing Twittter users.

The global Twitterati have set their sights on Twitter, widely decrying a reported plan by the microblogging site to blow out its length limit to as much as 10,000 characters.

The plan, first reported by Re/code late on Tuesday, sparked huge traffic on the hashtag #Twitter10k, with most of the posts there pleading for Twitter not to lift its long-standing 140-character limit.

“Dear Twitter, Let’s not,” wrote Lab Girl in a typically concise post.   Read more »


The TISOs, left media and Twitter terrorists are eating their own

Danyl at Dimpost writes:

Second day back at work and NZ Twitter is already the site of pointless feuds, the latest one causing one of the best journalists in the country to delete her account so she doesn’t have to engage with progressive activists any more.

He’s referring to Kirsty Johnston, the NZ Herald’s embedded education unionist and press release rewriter.   Sorry, “one of the best journalists”.

She quit Twitter.  She’s over it.   Not because she’s been getting hounded by trolls or right-wing nut jobs, but because of their own team requiring group think, group speak and group conformance at all times.

And if you don’t?

Something I think most people don’t get about social-media pile-ons is that being the subject of one is disproportionately upsetting and aggravating in a way that’s hard to comprehend unless you’ve been there. I’ve been having debates and arguments and fights on social media for years, and gotten all sorts of weird abuse and threats for things I’ve written, and none of it really affects me. But having your timeline flood with insults and call-outs and criticism and snark from dozens of people all at once is really genuinely upsetting. I’m not sure why. But it is. Even if someone has a really good point to make it generally gets lost in all the noise and just contributes to the sense of being unfairly ganged-up on, usually over something trivial. Read more »

A message to social media whingers…GFY


Tim Dick writes in the SMH:

Diddums, four times over.

To the Sydney woman whose expensive Uber trip home cost $720 rather than under $100 because of Uber’s well-known practice of hiking the price when demand outstrips supply, as it does on New Year’s Eve. “We’d had a few drinks and there might have popped up a notice about a surcharge,” Skye Shanahan cried to the Herald. “But I had no idea it could be anywhere near that.”

To Russell Crowe, who took his kids on a plane and moaned to the Twitterverse that Virgin wouldn’t take his wee petals’ hoverboards in the hold, given the worries about spontaneous combustion of some types of lithium batteries. Then he moaned again. He was still moaning three days later.

To the injured TV reporter who asked for a business class upgrade given a holiday injury, only to take it to Jetstar on its Facebook page when she didn’t get one.    Read more »


Sonny Bill Williams doesn’t want Syrian children bombed


The images of dead children tweeted by Sonny Bill Williams are purportedly casualties of a Russian airstrike on a Syrian school.

Without picking sides, Williams wrote: “What did these children do to deserve this? This summer share a thought for the innocent lives lost everyday in war.” Read more »

I can’t see a problem with this


I am really struggling to see what the problem is here.

A POPULAR nutritionist has been slammed on social media amid claims the title of her new weight loss program, Stop being a fat bitch, is derogatory towards women.

Australian nutritionist and author Lola Berry — who describes herself as being “inspired to better everyday lives” — announced the release of her controversial weight loss program on Facebook over the weekend.

“STOP BEING A FAT BITCH! It’s here!!! My first ever 4 week weight loss plan! Launching now!!,” Ms Berry wrote.

“Available at #‎stopbeingafatbitch is something I used to say to myself over and over … this program is not just about the food plan and recipes, it’s also about changing your mindset to achieve your health goals! Can’t wait to hear what you think!!”

Ms Berry was inundated with negative responses in relation to the title.

Read more »