Naming and Shaming

by ??? Fri Sep 12, 2003 21:56

We are not interested in your fiction. Why don't you go and write a book? Though I don't think any publisher with integrity would publish it if it is just a means for you to smear one section of society.

by Caspian Fri Sep 12, 2003 21:16

I think I'll do a bit of naming and shaming myself. A friend of mine was beaten up and robbed by three young travelling people yesterday. He was kicked about the head whilst on the ground and his ankle was smashed and he was robbed of £40. He caught the names of the of the spirited young pranksters. James and Sean and another from the Travellers Rest near Latimer Road in West London. Tut, tut. I hope their mammies and daddies are not too severe on them when they read this post. Perhaps they ought to be sent on a climbing holiday in Wales to be shown the error of their ways.

by Illegal Eagle Fri Sep 12, 2003 03:26

Lone gunman, if it is in printed form it is libel, not slander.
It would even be libel if it is spoken on the radio, or on a recording.
It would be slander if it is only spoken to someone, but not recorded or broadcast.
Hope that clarifies things.

by Phyllis Fri Sep 12, 2003 01:17 Fermoy

I object to calling Seainin a dickhead. At least a dickhead is of some use.

by unashamed Thu Sep 11, 2003 13:08

In principle there is nothing wrong with naming and shaming someone as long as you can stand over the facts of the case, which would mean the travellers at the centre of the allegations would have to go public at some stage, if not right at the beginning they would eventually have to stand up.

Also, naming and shaming because you are unwilling to stand up due to fear of retribution lets this person know that they have real power, that travellers are afraid of him. He could then pick on people knowing that all that will happen will be that "unproven" allegations will be made.

Perhaps travellers who are not affected by this person could mount a picket to kickstart it, but eventually someone will have to show their face.

by Lone Gunman Thu Sep 11, 2003 12:51

As suggested by a previous poster,will get you as much trouble as outright libel.Known as slander,and is just as much a tort as libel.As well as that who pays Grafitti any attention?Makes you look like a vandal.

by Mike M. Thu Sep 11, 2003 12:06

Well Julia, it is a bit of a problem alright, isn't it? Obviously there are issues surrounding make allegations against someone if those who were directly disadvantaged don't feel they can get directly involved. A couple of thoughts strike me though.

One is that the issue could be raised within this person's trade union, that this person might be informed by union members that allegations have been made against him and that he would want to watch his step or else a formal complaint to the corporation is likely. Whilst this isn't directly naming and shaming him/her, such an act is likely to focus the mind a little and also filter through the corporation grapevine as a cautionary tale for others.

Another is that the Travellers' Visibility Group in Cork could be approached with a view to taking the matter up with the corporation, without necessarily naming complainants. The problem with this route is that the corporation officials approached would probably demand names and dates and details etc.

It might also be worth your while contacting Mick Barry of the Socialist Party here in Cork - he has a fairly high profile and it looks like he might take a seat in the next corporation elections. I'm sure he would be interested in helping out if he could.

by ribbonboy Thu Sep 11, 2003 08:44

There are creative and deniable ways of naming and shaming. The mainstream press use it all the time. You can build up a standard article with quotes from (unnamed or named) sources detailing the offences (as much detail as possible)naming a "council employee" (don't name him, just call him that) as the alleged perpetrator and giving as many details as you can about him XYZ office. Then phone him up, say you are from Indymedia Ireland and say that you are enquiring about allegations that have been made about him being a racist. If he denies it (have a recording device in case he admits it), publish his denial eg." ...when contacted by indmedia ireland, Patrick Murphy of XYZ officedenied that he was the employee at the centre of allegations of anti-traveller racism or any knowledge of who it was...."

To be honest, though indymedia isn't going to get the story far unless you tip off a local journo who can carry astory about an indymedia story linking patrick murphy to racism, if you get me.

You should also consider fly posing and graffitiing (don't get caught)

Alternatively, try encouraging his victims to stand together. Convince them of the value of stopping this guy. The more people lodge complaints, the less isolated a plaintiff will feel.

by Browser - Organisation? - nun! Thu Sep 11, 2003 03:09

Don't use indymedia to make statements against named individuals, unless you can show that the allegations are substantially true, or are "fair comment". If you are unsure of what that means then read up on it, there are plenty of books available on Irish law, find the bits about defamation. You don't even need to buy the books, just spend some time browsing in Easons or any other bookshop, like I do. You can learn a lot for free about these and other matters. Anyway, try not to make difficulties for indymedia, this is not a forum for conducting private vendettas.

The previous comment from Seainin is not representative of the users of indymedia. It would be "fair comment" to say that "Seainin" is an ignorant dickhead. (You can say anything about Seainin since he is very unlikely to sue).