,
4 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
1/ I considered blogging about this account, whose weapon of choice is to call me & others 'grotesque antisemites.' Why this phrase?
To wound, call people what they hate.
To muddy the waters in the eyes of onlookers
To evade Twitter's censuring eye.
To defame activists against AS
To wound, call people what they hate.
To muddy the waters in the eyes of onlookers
To evade Twitter's censuring eye.
To defame activists against AS
2/ Does the technique work? In some ways.
It prolongs adversarial exchanges
It uses the language learned from our accusations against Corbynist AS 'Antisemitic,' 'Gaslighting,' 'Persecution.'
It follows the lead of Skwawkbox, along with the forums, & thus multiplies the message.
It prolongs adversarial exchanges
It uses the language learned from our accusations against Corbynist AS 'Antisemitic,' 'Gaslighting,' 'Persecution.'
It follows the lead of Skwawkbox, along with the forums, & thus multiplies the message.
3/ Does the technique fail?
I think so. Most people can see through it. It's attested in many Twitter accounts. Their anti-Jewish fervour is transparent although firmly denied. Their timelines provide context.
I think so. Most people can see through it. It's attested in many Twitter accounts. Their anti-Jewish fervour is transparent although firmly denied. Their timelines provide context.
4/ They use inappropriate but limited language. This person likes to call interlocutors 'grotesque'. Here's one I prepared earlier. FIN.
