1/ On today's episode of why it's embarrassing to be British we will be looking at viral misogyny and hashtag 'growler gate'. I will explain why such a hashtag trended in UK, and why/who was promoting it. #angelarayner
2/ 'Growler' is a British vulgar slang term for vagina. The hashtag in question is a reference to @AngelaRayner. It relates to an ongoing smear campaign by the Daily Mail, where they claimed Labour MP Angela Rayner engaged in Basic Instinct like-tactics to distract Boris Johnson
3/ The Daily Mail reported that Rayner used the term *ginger growler* herself, and joked about using it to distract Boris Johnson in private remarks she made to four unnamed Tory MPs. Labour described this as a smear.
4/ I analysed around 24000 tweets on the hashtags 'growler gate', 'all my growlers' and 'ginger growler'. I also analyzed phrases ' ginger growler' and those using the term in @AngelaRayner 's mentions. All in all, an alarming number of ppl willing to talk about an MP's privates
5/ Here are some of the most influential tweets. Right wing blog @guidofawkes drew attention to the 'ginger growler' story ahead of its release, while others deliberately tried to get it the term to trend (anon accounts of course)
6/ Many well-known influencers uncritically embraced the veracity of the anonymously sourced Daily Mail story, including self-styled free speech advocate and everyman @LozzaFox, journalist @SoniaPoulton@GBNews stalwart @EssexPR
7/ The most salient biographical descriptors of those attacking @AngelaRayner while referring to her 'growler' are pro-Brexit, Boris Johnson fans. Indeed the most frequent noun in their bios was 'Brexit'. This is perhaps unsurprising given the Daily Mail's right wing bias.
8/ The below time series graph shows @GuidoFawkes popularising the term 'ginger growler' ahead of the story's release. He also accused @AngelaRayner of lying about it but doesn't accuse Glen Owen of lying, even though in his initial story he never mentioned Rayner was 'joking'
9/ This story has prompted people to direct abuse at Rayner, specifically mentioning her vagina, which is, of course, what happens when the Daily Mail runs misogynistic smears. In the past 24 hours, over 703 growler-related mentions have been directed at Rayner's Twitter
10/ The nature of this harassment can be seen below. Every two minutes or, Rayner is receiving some bullying comment using the term 'growler'. Imagine receiving that much invasive and vulgar abuse, and imagine that it is being abetted by a national newspaper.Such brave journalism
11/ That I am even doing this thread is kind of absurd. The fact is, the miasma of misogyny that is the Daily Mail ran a misogynistic hit piece because they find it hard to stomach the fact women, especially working-class women, can be successful on their own merits and without
12/ the use of seduction. Indeed, that trope just fits the typical misogynistic stereotype that women exploit their sexuality to manipulate men. Hey it's a story as old as the bible right! Of course, it's not enough that the Daily Mail has succeeded in creating
13/ a national level imaginary of Rayner's naked body, but have prompted a stream of sexualised abuse at her Twitter account. Also @TwitterSupport - learn what a growler is.
14/ So basically. The Daily Mail created an unironic misogynistic hit piece about Rayner that they tried to back track out of by describing it as the result of a joke, despite still blaming Rayner for the misogyny that they'd initiated. All that with the added ignomy of
15/ unleashing a Twitter pile on against Rayner. Be interesting to see what proportion of those accounts are having a pop at Neil Parish. I'm guessing 0
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
🧵1/ I analysed the headline and lead paragraph of 536 English news articles including the terms "Maccabi" + "Amsterdam" and classified them using Claude 3.5 Sonnet to determine how many framed Israelis as victims or non-Israelis as primary victims (as well as both).
2/ The results are fairly striking. 65% of articles frame Israelis as the victim, while only 5% frame Non-Israelis as victims. 24% are neutral while 9% framed both groups as victims. Quite clear the media emphasised violence as anti-Israeli and antisemitic, especially early on
3/ There isn't much evidence too of corrective framing at this point, although a small increase in neutral framing a week after the incident. Israeli victimhood was categorised as emphasis of violence initiated by non-Israelis, and focus on anti-Israeli or antisemitic violence
🧵 1/ Part of understanding what is going on in Amsterdam is also to understand the coordinated anti-Arab, anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant campaigns run with huge amounts of money targeting Europe. Here's a short private Eye article about an investigation I did with @SohanDsouza
2/ Here's a write-up by @karamballes on the campaign in @BylineTimes "Disinformation Campaign on Social Media Reached More Than 40 Million People – but Meta ‘Alarmingly’ Hasn't Revealed the Culprits' bylinetimes.com/2024/08/30/qat…
@karamballes @BylineTimes 3/ ...How a covert influence campaign helped Europe’s far right
Our findings about the shadowy multi-platform operation attacking Qatar and stoking Islamophobia to further its far-right agenda in Europe and beyond call for immediate action. aljazeera.com/opinions/2024/…
🧵🚨1/ This is nuts. After mysteriously deleting a package covering the Amsterdam protests, Sky News have put up a new version. The new version completely changes the thrust to emphasise that the violence was antisemitic. See the opening screenshot change below
2/Even the tweet accompanying the video has changed. It has explicitly shifted from mentioning anti-Arab slogans to removing the phrase "anti-Arab" and using antisemitism. It also removes mention of vandalism by Israeli fans. An extremely clear editorial shift!
3/ They have also inserted into the video, right after the opening footage of Dutch Prime Minister condemning antisemitsm. This was not in the original video.
1/ If you break down the BBC's live reporting of what happened in Amsterdam, you can see the disproportionate attention it pays to Maccabi fans and Israelis as victims, with far less attention paid to the actions of Maccabi fans. Here are the sources interviewed.
2/ In terms of mentions of Arab, Dutch or other Ajax fans, there is very little emphasis on Arab safety, with the majority of coverage focused on Maccabi fans as victims. There are vox pops with fans, but very little interaction with non-Maccabi people.
3/ The language used to describe the attacks on the Maccabi fans is also much stronger, ranging from pogroms to brutal and shocking. Similar terms aren't use for the anti-Arab racism.
🚨1/ This New York Times piece is wild. Let's go through it.
Firstly, the lede is an emphasis that attacks in Amsterdam were based on antisemitism, yet it cites no evidence of this, but DOES cite evidence of anti-Arab chants.
2/ The claims of antisemitism are based primarily on the Prime Minister of the Netherlands, who tweeted that the attacks were antisemitic. Note - the Dutch Prime Minister didn't call out anti-Arab or anti-Palestinian racism from Maccabi fans.
3/ The piece links to an Amsterdam police statement to talk about the violence - although the police statement doesn't mention anything about antisemitism.
🧵 'At least 1,800 bots on the social media site X are promoting the controversial choice of Azerbaijan, a major oil and gas producer, to host next month’s ...#COP29, according to a new analysis shared exclusively with The Washington Post".
2/ The analysis by Marc Owen Jones, an expert on disinformation at @NUQatar, focused on roughly 2,800 X accounts that collectively sent around 10,800 tweets, retweets and replies about the conference between Oct. 17 and Oct. 24.
3/ Detection
73% of all accounts active in sample created in the space of 3 quarters in 2024.
Conservative estimates suggest 66% (1876) accounts in the sample are fake (bots) based on activity over the past week