Thread: Something I've been thinking a lot about this week is just how "good", for want of a better word, Home Office comms are. I mean, they're hideous, but they are also effective in their intended outcome, which isn't really to "communicate" so much as undermine opposition. 1/
The "activist lawyers" line was a masterstroke, because despite it being objectively wrong and misleading, there is no way to demonstrate that without them being able to reinforce the message to their target audience. 2/
It also provides them with the perfect cover for their claims that the asylum system is "overwhelmed" despite actual numbers of asylum seekers being down on previous years. "Don't look at us guv. Look at those activist lawyers holding up the process". 3/
Likewise the strategic use of "consultations" with NGOs, INGOs, legal authorities etc. It doesn't matter that all of them say the Home Office can't legally do what it suggests. They can still put out press releases saying they "spoke to UNHCR before implementing plans" etc. 4/
For most of the public that reads as though they have gained the support of the very organisations which are out there condemning their actions at every step. It is quite a striking way of taking out the opposition before it has even managed to start opposing plans. 5/
Then you have the carefully leaked batshit crazy ideas, like wave machines in the channel, or carefully coordinated "trials" of using jet skis to "deter" dinghies crossing the channel. They know they can't actually do these things, but they also know they can stoke outrage. 6/
All of that makes it easier to push through equally abhorrent policies, such as penalising asylum seekers for their manner of entry despite it violating international law, because those policies sound "moderate" in relation to some of the ones leaked. 7/
The problem facing organisations which oppose government plans is that we risk getting sucked into them the minute we do so. They know what they objections are, they might be callous but they aren't stupid, and they have planned for it. 8/
They are treating it as a game, and it is one which, if we are all being honest with ourselves, they are winning. That's why it is so important, and I do this myself so hold my hands up to that, to think before getting outraged. 9/
Personal attacks against Patel might be cathartic, and easy, but they yet again play into the Home Office's hands. Why do you think she is still in post. They can be brushed off and used to make advocates for human rights seem unreasonable at best, unhinged at worst. 10/
No-one ever considers themselves the "bad guys". The Home Office definitely don't. So when attacks get personal, and often misogynistic and racist in the case of Patel, it just helps them reinforce the idea that they are the "righteous" ones. 11/
The same is true when misinformation is used to attack them. There are plenty of genuine things to condemn and oppose, but when we light upon something which sounds juicy but is easily disprovable, they can say we are just making stuff up and discredit legitimate criticism. 12/
We all need to be more strategic about this, because they definitely are. We are getting out manoeuvred for the most part, although some groups are trying hard not to be, but often it is well-meaning social media activists who are hurting us the most. 13/
Outrage is easy. You see a story and rant, we all do it, I definitely do. It's not helpful though. They have planned for it. We become part of their comms campaign. It's time to stop being played and start being more aware in our objections, or we will keep losing. 14/

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Daniel Sohege 🧡

Daniel Sohege 🧡 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @stand_for_all

19 Sep
Deep breath, self DX for autism is entirely valid, and often necessary. I was technically first diagnosed at 6, but was never told until last year, so I ended up self diagnosing, which led to a long road to getting, another, formal diagnosis at 27. 1/
Even when someone is formally diagnosed though, if we present as too "normal" we will have idiots claiming we aren't autistic, or demanding we publish our diagnosis online. Now, my diagnosis statement is long and personal. Guess what, I am not sharing it with random people. 2/
For the most part, in my own personal experience, autistic individuals want to be left alone and just accepted. Unfortunately as that isn't happening it means some of us feel the need to step forward and put ourselves out there. You know what, it sucks. 3/
Read 5 tweets
19 Sep
Oh FFS @MigrationWatch, sound out the words slowly and run your finger a bit further down the page. Pushbacks are highly illegal for multiple reasons, under various international laws, and vessels have a legal duty to protect life at sea, not cause people to drown.
98% of those who cross the channel seek asylum and vast majority of people who do so are granted it on either first instance or appeal. So this one is at best a highly disingenuous reading of data, at worst a flat out lie designed to stoke hatred.
Interesting that they quote the Mayor of Calais who has made it illegal of asylum seekers to be provided with food and water by NGOs, wonder if that may have something to do with it. Also France actually has higher "benefits" for asylum seekers, so again this is bollocks.
Read 6 tweets
17 Sep
Noticeable how already there is a slow decline of attention regarding Afghanistan, as with Syria, Yemen, Venezuela, and every refugee situation in the world. No wonder the government always feels so comfortable demonising asylum seekers. They know everyone forgets about them.
I mean, in a purely practical sense I get it. People have only so much attention span and as the news roles on they focus on the next story. Combine that with that hideous phrase "compassion fatigue", and it's not remotely surprising people forget.
Refugees don't forget about their situations though. When the cameras stop filming and the public stops caring they are still living in those situations. That's why legislation has to defend all refugees, no matter where from or how they reach the UK.
Read 6 tweets
9 Sep
Cannot stress how not only inhumane this is, but also massively illegal. "Pushbacks" violate international law, not to mention place people's lives in more danger. They also don't deter people trying to seek safety. 1/
bbc.co.uk/news/uk-584959…
This isn't some hazy grey area of law either. While it is perfectly legal for someone to cross the channel and seek asylum, it is fundamentally illegal to penalize an asylum seeker for their manner of entry or conduct pushback operations at sea. 2/

politico.eu/article/eu-pus…
Right now @pritipatel has singlehandedly destroyed any last shred of credibility the UK had that it may care about the rule of law, and has further undermined the international refugee regime, placing yet more lives at risk. 3/ #r4today
Read 9 tweets
8 Sep
No amount of money will prevent crossings. End of the day, smugglers and traffickers just move further down the coast, making journeys longer and more dangerous. It isn't illegal to cross the channel, but it is illegal to penalise them for doing so. #r4today
There are a multitude of reasons people may feel safer in UK than France, language, family connections, not being routinely attacked by police officers. For many asylum seekers though they don't know where they will end up, and making crossings more dangerous doesn't change that.
The UK spends close to £400 million on immigration enforcement, liable to continue to rise. At a time when we are talking about "social care cost" and more that money would be better served being invested into the country, rather than into trying to keep people out.
Read 4 tweets
7 Sep
Thing is likes of @SimonJonesNews have to know by now that they aren't reporting "news". For the main they're just stoking hatred by reporting without context. Even the most basic of research would show some asylum seekers aren't safe in France, yet he repeats it without question
It isn't just Jones though. It is a problem endemic in many areas of the media. Shiny pictures of people landing on the beach make for great clickbait. The harm which reporting out of context does is lost on what is effectively the "ambulance chasing" variety of journalists.
This is very much why we need better regulations over how the press report on asylum seekers, and in particular children. We are talking about a vulnerable group, and the media coverage of them only ends up placing them at more risk and leading to a denial of their rights.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(