Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
gets pretty grim. http://comedychat.co.uk/2012/09/05/comedians-using-their-fans-for-co-ordinated-safety-in-numbers-bullying/
meh, it's the internet. Can people really get upset by load of people who have never met them? If people are that upset they can delete their twitter or block or whatever. I reckon the chances are most people who get "flamed" via this actually just think its a funny story to tell. This is massively different from bullying say, happening on Facebook at a school, etc.
ricky gervais has definitely broken bad
but that was the most boring thing i ever read
But I agree that it's pretty pathetic that those comics are unable to shake off some criticism, especially when they can easily just get anyone banned from twitter if they're harassing them.
The Noel Fielding tweets are ridiculously childish, I'm amazed that anyone would follow that drivel.
skim-read the more rambly bits of it.
my mobile is blocking that website for some reason
I don't follow many celebrities, as it's not what I use Twitter for.
I was a fan of The Mighty Boosh, as I suspect many people were. Then when he was on Buzzcocks, what I really liked about him was that he didn't resort to the borderline bullying of some contestants that certain other team members and presenters had sometimes been guilty of in the past... all of his stuff was really good-natured. So I followed him on Twitter for a while but then unsubscribed because, frankly, it was utter bollocks... but what has happened recently is horrible.
I have some sympathy with anyone on Twitter that has lots of followers and has occasionally lost it with someone, because anyone with a lot of followers will get a lot of idiots, and some of the abuse gets very personal. But anyone with a brain can see what happens if you then handle that wrongly. Even then, I could have some sympathy with the famous person in question making the mistake once, seeing what happened, and handling it differently next time (i.e. block the idiot and/or address them directly... or ignore them). But to make the mistake more than once is unforgivable.
that despite the fact that Noel Fielding should have known better, I do not believe for one minute that he would have intended the outcome that transpired. The test is whether he now avoids making the same mistake (yet) again.
some people have said that they've left a few things out and twisted a couple of points.
i dunno if that's true cos I've got better things with my time to do rather than go through noel fielding's twitter feed
If it were up to them, the world would be a sterile place where you had to value everyone's achievements, no matter how banal, and never say a bad word about anything, and have to pretend to like One Direction, and not to laugh at any jokes that might be directed at anyone or anything.
or people like the person who wrote an article suggesting it's not that cool to drive people to attempted suicide in the name of lulz?
but yeah, their behaviour isn't particularly edifying. It's part of the reason that I really, really hate Twitter. Or to be more fair, what Twitter has become/how it's used.
are interesting, funny and intelligent on Twitter. I guess I just find it irksome how pervasive Twitter has become.
Basically, I want to be bitter and cynical about social media but after 7 or so years I'm too attached to my Facebook account to tear into that.
I'd probably be a little more indignant if the writer didnt come across like he was crying about the unfairness in the world while writing it. As my old grandaddy used to say, "you live by the word, you die by the sword"
"you live by the sword, you die by the sword" - although word fits quite nicely I guess
you swim with sharks, you're going to get bitten
everybody wants the honey, but nobody wants the sting
My friend has already been chased off the site by bullying. Stop bullying people DiS :(
The most try hard middle class mid thirties office worker, choose noise music
nobody wants to commit suicide
Stop taking me out my comfort zone
about hitting 3 million followers and being able to give them all £30 each. £90 million??? I knew he'd be rich, but fuck me.
and in a moment of weakness tell someone to piss off. They're only human. The consequences that follow, of their fans piling on, isn't directly their fault.
BUT in the cases mentioned here it seems to go beyond that. Celebs need to be aware of their influence, of the rabidity of their fans, and that with great power comes great responsibility yadda-yadda, and that this kind of thing demonstrably does happen, and they need to keep their big mouths shut.
I hate Twitter's reductive mob mentality. Yes, it's what you make it and all that, but it has a pretty horrible aspect regardless. I remember when a former colleague wrote a story for a newspaper about someone who had a pretty big twitter following. The story was controversial, but it was fair, and true, and accurate, but that didn't stop the subject's twitter followers immediately sending hundreds of incredibly personal, hurtful tweets his way. Some even wrote blogs, completely misinterpreting the story, and began tweeting those round, which gained more traction, and soon rent-a-gob celebs were retweeting about how awful it all was, all while my mate was, completely unfairly, receiving thousands of messages attacking him. Now, you could say its part of his role as a journalist to accept criticism for his stories, and it is, but Twitter turned vile and ugly and any dissenting voices were immediately jumped upon and crushed. It happens way too easily. I don't think 140 characters is conducive to debate or good thought. It should probably just be reserved for links and one-liners.
i can't for the life of me understand the appeal of either
was Ricky Gervais soliciting t-shirt slogans for "chavs". And deleting his tweets bullying a person who didn't get the joke almost immediately. What an incredibly unpleasant, unfunny, cowardly bellsniff that man is.
is that online anywhere?
I watched it and winced when Gervais was talking. He was talking down to guys who had been doing stand-up for something like 80 years combined and who started in places where nobody cared one way or the other if they succeeded.
The most interesting moment was when they were talking about their favourite jokes and all of them defended bare-bones funny jokes and Gervais ranted against against them as almost immoral. I know I prefer all three of the other comics to Gervais so I'm completely biased, but it was an embarassing programme to watch, particularly as he kept talking over Chris Rock.
he was just describing how he experienced comedy. His experiences have, justifiably, been different. It doesn't make him any worse a comedian, although whether he is anyway is obviously subjective. And Seinfeld and Louis have both invited him to work with them since, so you know... they couldn't have been that bothered.
Seemed to me the others, especially Rock, thought Gervais was a dilettante as a stand-up. When Gervais was going on about his early days in stand-up, Rock mumbled something like "when was that? last week?"
except the person in question hadn't actually Tweeted it @ Pegg. He must have been Googling his name, found the Tweet, and decided to insult the guy. Just seems too much to me.
but yeah either way it's really not a classy move.
Essential that is what he is creating, a brand. Pegg's Twitter is nice, it's funny. Leave the guy alone, he created Spaced ffs...he's exempted of criticism.
If you don't think Spaced is funny there is something deeply wrong with you.
Got time for Hot Fuzz, though.
Congratulations on completely missing the point
Just because their lives are better? If you badmouthed somebody on Facebook and they found the comment, no one would criticise them for responding in kind, would they?
Most people in this *thread* have probably Googled themselves, never mind celebrities who are inevitably - and I say this as non-judgementally as possible - going to have an inflated sense of self-importance due to the media talking about them all the time. Can you not step back from your self-righteousness for just 5 minutes?
wouldn't have hundreds/thousands of people telling them how great they are. it's not a comparable situation. you'd think famous people could have a bit of perspective about it all instead of rabidly hunting down people who aren't so into them.
Are celebrities being criticised for Googling themselves or for being sensitive to insults? Either way, I don't think having hundreds/thousands of people telling a person how great they are is the best way to give that person perspective. Which is the point of the article, maybe.
Second one. I made a flippant comment which you've overreacted to.
*I don't think having hundreds/thousands of people telling a person how great they are is the best way to give that person perspective. Which is the point of the article, maybe.*
Maybe come back in a couple of months, have another read of your posts and see how well they sit.
against people who dare to criticise them
Or are their followers just joining in of their own accord?
not fussed about the 'bullying' aspect, to be honest, but anyone who writes shit like 'love you all my twitter babies x remember, life is nonsense so wear silly shoes' can get out of my life.
I haven't read all 20,000 words in detail, I've got to be honest. It's not the most noble response from Fielding/Pegg either way, but then, at the same time, there aren't many things I'm less a fan of than people feeling bulletproof on the internet. Maybe this is the closest approximation to the reaction they'd get if they said these things in real life.
Tell me what you think I mean and then I'll tell you if you're right.
but if you say something online, you've got to know there's at least a possibility it'll get back to the person you're talking about, right? If you say something to a friend at the Star Trek 2 premiere, it's highly unlikely the friend will run over and inform Simon Pegg, whatever it is that's said. If they did - or, at least, if you started shouting abuse at him from the sidelines - he'd probably call security over. And then you'd possibly get escorted away from the premiere. There's a tangible, negative outcome. If you look at some of the stuff that gets said on here, you're quite liable to think "If that person behaved like this in real life, someone, at some stage, would probably punch them in the face". I'm liable to, anyway. Maybe it's just me. People *don't* say the things they say online in real life though, whether you think the repercussions for them otherwise would be that severe or not, because online, you're bulletproof. There's nothing anyone can do to make you stop. Except maybe coordinate a bullying attack over Twitter.
We're free to speak about popular people honestly, and anyone who reads it is free to respond. If you don't like it - on Twitter, at least - you can make our account private. Block the comments that have already been made and the abuse is ended instantly. And what weight does the abuse from strangers really have anyway? The article mentions a sufferer of cyclothymia who tried to kill herself; to me, that is primarily a story about somebody with cyclothymia, not a story about someone who was insulted over Twitter.
If you'd like a more feature rich blogging platform that would allow you to slag the living hell out of someone, yet still retain privacy, there are loads to choose from.
You need to use the right tools for the right job innit.
*retain a degree of immunity/distance etc
of course, you'll likely not have the same size audience for your bile as you would have had on twitter. but that won't matter, cos the celeb baiting was nothing to do with the audience and reaction it got - it was all about the need to express yourself.
i think the example with the art critic being mass attacked by fielding's followers (at his request) for daring to suggest that the comedian might not be the best person to interview the countries most successful living artist is worst abuse of status.
*and strengths, in other scenarios.
...and we're back to too many people not having an appreciation of/respect for what twitter ultimately is (when all the hyperbole about it is stripped away).
but i think that fielding response is to a reviewer in the telegraph how slagging off a show fielding did, and the pegg one i think is just some guy who said he found pegg irritating (and wasn't tweeted to pegg).
i guess if you go out of your way to antagonise someone by tweeting directly at them or something then, well, tough shit - but i should be free to be watching tv and tweet something like THIS NOEL FIELDING SHOW IS SHIT without opening myself up to abuse from thousands of people
A public tweet is a public tweet.
If you want a private conversation, stop using twitter in an open/public manner.
If you post stuff on the internet you're having a public conversation. If you don't want to take part in such a bilious conversation, don't post shite on a site that allows a few thousand instant smackdowns. You're free to use one of the other many other free internet publishing tools that facilitate one way slaggings, leaving you blissfully free of the consequences that would be inherent in the use of a public twitter account.
but it seems pretty different to me
and if I found someone I didn't know badmouthing me on Facebook or Bebo or whereverthefuck I'd certainly be angry, disappointed and/or upset, but I sure as shit wouldn't log on and start an argument.
Probably because they should know that they will have an army of desperate, needy, wannabe entourage members just ready to go out and (even if unrequested) defend their honour.
YET Linehan was once really really rude to me on twitter then deleted the tweet the coward
I think there's a degree of irony to the policeman tag.
that has made me re-think the issue. Although the personal insults he directed at Gervais and Fielding don't help his case, it just gives the comedians and their fans an excuse to ignore the message.
He makes passing reference to Doug Stanhope (had a go at Mail's Alison Pearson for an article she wrote about Tony Nickinson under the justification that she had just said horrible things at, literally, one of the most defenceless people in the world). I'm not sure thats quite fair- as soon as Stanhope realised what was happening and that he had given her a bit of moral high ground, he asked his fans to stop.
The line about 'contrived, try-hard, drippy fucking surrealism' sums it up for me nicely. There was just something about Noel Fielding - he was trying too hard to be out there, like he really wanted to be David Bowie more than anything, but he lacked the talent.
He seemed insecure then, but this proves it. What a dick.
Gervais can bugger off too. He's completely full of himself, has been for years, but hasn't actually done anything of note for ages. If it turned out that he really had broken bad, i.e. holed himself up in an RV to cook meth, then I would have more respect for him.
Went off Simon Pegg a long time ago - I'm not particularly surprised that he or Gervais are guilty of this.
The page is now a 503 error. Did Dis just Slashdot this page? Or is it linked to elsewhere? Dude.
It keeps going down then coming back again. Probably a coordinated DDoS attack.
Clicked on it again and it was fine.
But I guess it's all a matter of proportion.
In time, celebs will stop doing this as the public won't be behind them (or because they appreciate the moral implications)
»MissSpidey suffers from Cyclothymic disorder. Twitter was a vital support network for her. With that suddenly taken away – through no fault of her own...«
»...the original american woman was tweeting highly offensive anti abortion and anti women’s rights tweets. Fielding was responding to this and other offensive tweets when Miss Spidey got involved. Miss Spidey did not politely inform Fielding that his use of the word retarded was offensive to her and many others, or choose to act constructively [...] she instead insulted Fielding several times and at length...«
Who knows what to believe? One thing I do know is that I'll be fucked if I'm trawling through tweets to verify what's what.
PEOPLE WHO use twitter like belms...
it's completely brought down barriers between people. It's heightened the cult of obsession and the culture of celebrity and bringing them both together. People are more famous than ever, and fans are more obsessed than ever and with some form of direct access. It's an immovable object against an unstoppable force, consequently shit will hit the fan.
However just because we don't fully understand it and its consequences yet doesn't mean that people who have the branez to create an account shouldn't be aware that telling people to hate on someone won't result in hate. Shit fucking sticks.
I guess one thing it does is show the true colours of some people. People who feed off their fame more than anything else. It's quite repugnant to be honest.
That last one was really quite sad. 'Big nose'? What the fuck how childish and repellent is that from Fielding?
I used to love the Boosh as a kid and would worship the ground he walked on. But twitter however accidental gives you an insight into how they really are.
Essentially people are dicks.
idk. There's a rarely a straightforward story. People should just think twice and be nice.
but deciphering what Noel Fielding's definition for it is would involve researching his tweeting history, which is not a good job for any sane person. and given that "big nose" as an insult has a long history and dodgy connotations, he was lucky that somebody didn't attack him for being an anti-semite, for example, or an oppressor of the beauty-challenged.
i have to say that 'the mighty douche' made me laugh.
in the voice of Zap Brannigan
on Twitter you can make people pay for being abusive dicks, but you normally can't in real-life and probably haven't realised that in doing so they became <dramatic voice> THE VERY THING THEY SET OUT TO RID THE WORLD OF.
He's like the last person you expected it to happen to
I started following Andrew WK on Twitter. Well worth it. With some slebs, you expect them not to really be the great guy they are on telly. Fielding and Gervais unfortunately proved themselves to be total dicks.
But Andrew WK is, I think, the real deal. I don't see how someone could play him as a role for all this time in any case, through every gig and hours-long interview.
I'd be more disappointed in him if he broke character than anyone else. I don't really care if Ricky Gervais is a prat in 'real life', his work isn't who he is in the same way. AWK's job isn't just music, it's being AWK in every way: unrelentingly positive and inclusive. He's the perfect antidote to this sordid affair, in other words.
If it was him encouraging his followers to pick on someone, it wouldn't just destroy my belief in PARTYING HARD, it would affect my outlook on humanity as a whole.