Slashdot Mirror
Blogger Humiliates Town Councillors Into Resigning
Dr_Barnowl writes "In an occurrence first postulated in sci-fi and later lampooned by stick figures, it seems that a blogger has actually been responsible for the mass resignation of elected officials — a British town council — largely by calling them 'jack***es' and Nazis. What's next? The deposition of a president with 'your mom' smacktalk?"
Now someone thinks they have the right to comment on Council decisions - and the toys get thrown out of the pram.
This is not about bloggers. It's about rural Conservatives finding their views called into question. It would be exactly the same if it was a campaigning newspaper, or if the people in subsidised housing started a resident's group and sent someone to see what happened in Council meetings.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
In the UK its fairly easy to get sued for making written statements about people unless you are scrupulously accurate, and having looked at the blog in question he's taken a fair few risks..
Probably the traditional British tolerance for ecentricity is the only thing preventing the targets of his jibes from crucifying him in a civil court...
I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
If we believe all the media hype - that this guy's blog did actually have any bearing on the resignations of these people, then it's a bad day for democracy. They had been elected in a legal way, by winning the most votes from the people in their wards. Then one person, decides he doesn't like them and starts a personal assault on them: collectively and individually. Now, it could well be said that these unpaid officials shouldn't have put themselves in the public eye if they aren't prepared to take some heat - but they're really just volunteers (and a lot of them aren't exactly in the prime of life). As a consequence of this continual sniping, they decide they've had enough and quit. So much for giving the electors representation, so much for reflecting the wishes of the people. One person's ability to publicise his personal and (I am told) unfounded views about their personal lives and business interests reduces the democratic process to a farce.
If he objects so much, why didn't he stand for election himself?
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
I'm going to kill Cory Doctorow right now. I know his chances of making it as Polemarch (or Archon or whatever, I can't be assed reading Ender's Game because I know the plot twist) are minimal but I can't take that chance.
echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
Doesn't that happen on every council?
Just reading a few of the last entries of the blog:
So no, I don't think it's exactly a newspaper. It's more focused and more dangerous, like being an opposition leader in an only semi-democratic country.
They are politicians - part of the required skill set is media-savvy. Also, the Internet is not the only medium.
And they do get paid - this is a town council, not a parish council. Quote from a Mail Online story (yes I know) "Local councillors pocketed pay rises of double the level of inflation last year, a study has revealed. Nearly 20,000 picked up an average of £9,300 in 'allowances', the basic pay they get from town halls. In some local authorities, the sum was more than £20,000 a year."
"Cock Up Your Beaver" does not mean what you think. This sig is intended to clog filters and annoy do-gooders
You are wrong on so many levels. Firstly, they are not volunteers. They get paid for every meeting they attend and they get expenses paid for any work they undertake as a council member. Secondly, are you suggesting that democracy means you cannot exercise free speech ? Thirdly, are you suggesting that elected officials, who presumably had to canvas support in order to get elected, are so unsure of their position that a single person can force them to resign without so much as a struggle ? And lastly, if you as a member of the electorate exposed a scandal involving the council and publicised it, are you then guilty of something or are you doing the electorate a favour ?
.... Are they going to take their toys and go home ?
Seriously, if they resigned over one persons so called ravings, then they didn't have much authority to start with, not to mention cahones. I know that if I found financial irregularities in a councils spending and could reliably document it, it would be my duty to inform the electorate. I have no interest in being a councillor, but that doesn't mean they can get away with it. Why should I invest time and money in making myself electable merely to point out the illegal activities of others ?
I repeat, if the whole council resigns over 1 persons unsubstantiated rant, then either they have got skeletons to hide or they are worthless as politicians. Politicians argue all the time, that's what they do. But one non elected person can force their resignation ? Please
I agree entirely. There's this meme going around that holds that if newspapers die, investigative journalism will vanish from the face of the earth. I think this case could well serve as a counter example.
Incidentally, is it me or is there a a strong subtext of "don't try this at home, kids!" to many of the posts on this topic? You'd almost think some people were worried in case this sort of grass roots political activism should catch on....
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
Just because something is common doesn't mean it's right.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
Having watched small town politics for a while, I think many people get elected filled with idealism and then quickly get disillusioned by how petty and nasty the politics can get. Imagine being put under a microscope where saying hello to a couple fellow board members at the only grocery store in town can become an illegal non-public session?
I'm not saying that local government is pure as driven snow. There's certainly plenty of sweetheart deals and backroom stuff. But from what I've seen, being in local government means taking abuse on a level that's pretty the same thing as that kid in 7th grade who was lucky if he only got beat up once in a day.
+1 Troll - classic mix of truth and rampant hyperbole.
Local councils have been given way more power than they need allowing them to spend money on total nonsense - but;
I'm sure these were honest slips of the finger and that you of course had no agenda of your own to ply. But please try to remember that not everyone's definition of Freedom involves being left to fend for yourself while amoral corporations and modern day lords and barons in the forms of bankers and CEO's tie up the legal system for their own ends and prey upon those to small or poor to defend themselves. Also please remember that at least 75% of those civil servants (the 1 in 4 apparently :s) are low-level administrators who earn just above the min wage (current A-band salary in local and national Gov goes from approx £14,300 -16,500 - this band also covers cleaners, binmen, street cleaners, so called menial jobs etc.). Don't even pretend these are people you could do without, as the national outcry and massive disruptions caused by industrial action in just a few places pretty much proves their worth. The 1 in 4 also include teachers, nurses, GP's, doctors, police, paramedics, firemen, the civilian forces that help maintain the previous list, the armed forces in all its forms and the various arms of the MOD. These are the people that keep you alive and guard your freedoms, your children and your future. Yet well over 50% take home less than a supervisor at fucking McDonalds.
Keep your freedom to be fucked - I'd rather live in a country that recognises the need to protect certain freedoms by building an infrastructure - even if it does have to pruned once in a while (keeping in mind you prune from the top down :)).
The sad truth is, it sucks a lot. It being any of the following: Xkcd, Enders game, your favorite band, your favorite operating system, your mom. But ironically, no one really cares what you or I just wrote.
An organized walk-out in order to sabotage the council.
They can't or won't fix the things they are responsible for - so they stage a walkout and blame it all on the opposition coming from a vocal minority.
Being called "clowns" and "nazis" is hardly a cause for "Businessman Mr Canvin, 61" to storm out cause he is "not going to tolerate it when [he's] working for the town."
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
There is always an alternative choice, though it may not be the most pleasant of things to think about. Us American's kicked your government to the curb over a few tax disputes (and a few other issues). Placing cameras in private citizens' homes seem to me like a much bigger issue.
You guys could at least throw a few riots or something. And no, angry postings on slashdot do not count. By excusing this sort of behaviour all you are doing is shifting blame from your government to yourself.
Three big flaws in your argument here even at a casual glance:-
1) The proto-Americans had the advantage of an ocean between them and the people they were rebelling against, and the advantage of being on home territory against an enemy who had generally never even been to the rebels' continent. The situation would have been radically different if the American rebels were living in Clapham.
2) It's not "Us Americans" who rebelled at all - you personally had nothing at all to do with it - so it's rather precious of you to advocate that others risk their lives to do something that I suspect you have never done yourself.
3) The modern USA is exactly the sort of imperialist superpower that England was back then.
Overall, the pretense that modern Americans are some kind of ninja rebel outfit who would overthrow their government at the first sign of totalitarianism isn't helping anyone, especially when you sit in your comfy chair behind your (no doubt very rebellious) warrior keyboard and advocate that others risk their lives.
Personally, I'd have thought that investigative journalism was where someone investigated something, and then wrote about it. I don't really see where international espionage like activities form a necessary part of that.
I take it you mean "there's no overlap at all with Reuters and AP, because they don't do local news", and not "Reuters and AP don't do local news, therefore this doesn't overlap with investigative journalism at all". I'm not disputing the former.
Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
As long as you have a sign and it is clearly marked that trespassers will be shot.
When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!