Influencers over-editing photos in Social Media/Cyber-bullying accusations

pc7

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

I’m sorry but how much damages would Caris Closet have actually suffered, investing in poor quality tat isn’t too expensive

Also is it defamation if its true? Importing ****e from China and sticking your own tag on it, seems they got caught out. I've no problem with stuff coming from China once you aren't trying to sell it as your 'bespoke' design. You'd be bloody raging if you got caught by them. ('allegedly')

GingerLily

meeeeh wrote: »

There actually is a follow on story but it's about the BU and the online harrasment some people got after BU targeted them. This part explains a bit Cari's Closet angle.



Source:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nasty-vindictive-toxic-and-unhealthy-xmj35bcbr

Can't read
Thanks though!

meeeeh

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

I’m sorry but how much damages would Caris Closet have actually suffered, investing in poor quality tat isn’t too expensive

I certainly wouldn't a fan of stuff they sell but that doesn't mean that someone writting about them can forget about fact checking. Apparently one of their employees was named by BU, she requested her name to be removed because she was only an employee and that was refused. She apparently got loads of online harassment and ended on sick leave for five weeks because of it. I don't know how serious it was and how truthful the person making those claims is however deciding what damages, if any, they suffered is not up to you or me.

Pistachios & cream

To some extent I do hope cari’s closet go ahead with legal action. I think a test case in this area would be good. Also we would finally know if BU is RT.

However I don’t see them going through with it. It’s a costly exercise to go to court and unless the BU story was a complete fabrication it could easily go against them

pc7

ahayes84 wrote: »

However I don’t see them going through with it. It’s a costly exercise to go to court and unless the BU story was a complete fabrication it could easily go against them

And it brings more media attention on it, if the messages BU posted from CC family members are true, they'd have more to be worried about I would think.
Just listened to IT Galz, bit ott and dramatic imo, <snip>

GavMan

ahayes84 wrote: »

To some extent I do hope cari’s closet go ahead with legal action. I think a test case in this area would be good. Also we would finally know if BU is RT.

However I don’t see them going through with it. It’s a costly exercise to go to court and unless the BU story was a complete fabrication it could easily go against them

Unless the DM's and pics were all also total fabrications and that they can prove that, they have a job on their hands. Most of the stuff wasn't anything worse than you'd see on trust pilot or yelp or whatever.

wyrn

meeeeh wrote: »

I certainly wouldn't a fan of stuff they sell but that doesn't mean that someone writting about them can forget about fact checking. Apparently one of their employees was named by BU, she requested her name to be removed because she was only an employee and that was refused. She apparently got loads of online harassment and ended on sick leave for five weeks because of it. I don't know how serious it was and how truthful the person making those claims is however deciding what damages, if any, they suffered is not up to you or me.

Was this the email? Someone emailed CC and the reply was a little less than professional (if memory serves) and that's what BU put up.

erica74

Cari's Closet will go out of business if they go ahead with the case because they will surely have to prove what was posted was lies and, it looks like it was all true and that would be VERY bad for their business?
Plus, as far as BU is concerned, people sent her messages about Cari's Closet with photographic evidence and she posted them in good faith that they were true so, surely that covers her with regard to defamation? It's not like she made them up.

PawneeRanger

GingerLily wrote: »

Can't read
Thanks though!

You only need to register your email address to read The Times.

GingerLily

PawneeRanger wrote: »

You only need to register your email address to read The Times.

I thought they restricted the number of articles you read for free a month?

Opps!

ginandtonicsky

This story gets weirder and weirder. It's honestly like some sort of cheap made-for-TV movie designed to document the era of social media and bloggers and how mad of a world it all is.

Those lads from that cafe are a pack of clowns with the maturity and emotional intelligence of a four year old. Every "blogger" embroiled in this should be examining their own business ethics and moral backbone instead of getting involved in the dramatics of "who is she??" and making themselves look like a pack of self-obsessed teenagers who honestly should go for a walk outside in the fresh air and get over themselves. The game's up like, you got called out, now off you go and try to build a more reputable business that doesn't rely on photoshop, lying and the gullibility of young women to survive.

And that former boards poster...really disappointed to see that she's involved in all of this. <snip>

SozBbz

meeeeh wrote: »

SozBbz wrote: »

OK fine on the correction of the newspaper, but I don't see what point you're trying to make.

Just because its silly season then its fine if reporters don't check the  background of the stories they publish? Fine for them to take everyone at face value and not do any digging into their background and to whether they're credible as a person? The journalist in question did sloppy work and it was foolish to publish the story because on face value she appeared meek. I'm not saying he should have been able to out her as BU, but the evidence of her trolling seem well documented, and that would have coloured the story differently.

And of course death threats should be taken seriously. But if they turn out to be works of fiction, that too should be taken seriously as the Gardi don't have unlimited time/resources.

The facts about story are she made a report to Gardai about harassment, they are investigating, she claims she has anxiety attacks because of it. Everything else are just rumours, there are screen grabs and theories that RT trolled a whole pile of people but without getting actual IP addresses it's very hard to confirm without doubt the identity. No serious newspaper will touch those claims without a bit more solid proof. It's a lazy article about not much but what you consider proof is at the moment just speculation. Btw you are criticising an article you didn't even read.

I'm making a general point but this whole BU thing, blogger critism thrives on hearsay, gossip and it seems people following it are jumping to different conclusion every three hours. It's actually not surprising a group of Russian trolls can easily influence elections.

I did read it at the time actually, no need to speak for me.
I agree that its a lazy article, thats the point I'm making all along. IMO they should have looked deeper or not published at all. I think you'd find they consider themselves a serious publication, but what they did was temporarily give a person a platform to present themselves as a purely innocent bystander. Whether or not shes BU is one thing, I think it looks likely but I'm not the police so I'm not about to go out and do some amateur detective work. I don't think its beyond the reach of a newspaper to dig a little into a persons background before publishing a story.

GingerLily

SozBbz wrote: »

I did read it at the time actually, no need to speak for me.
I agree that its a lazy article, thats the point I'm making all along. IMO they should have looked deeper or not published at all. I think you'd find they consider themselves a serious publication, but what they did was temporarily give a person a platform to present themselves as a purely innocent bystander. Whether or not shes BU is one thing, I think it looks likely but I'm not the police so I'm not about to go out and do some amateur detective work. I don't think its beyond the reach of a newspaper to dig a little into a persons background before publishing a story.

I don't mean this sarcastically - but you should write a letter to the editor, I always love reading the quirky ones that get published whenever I'm at my inlaws, and at least they'd get feedback from the demographic that are interested in the story!

we'llallhavetea

It galz podcast is painful to listen to. What went on, <snip>?! Can't even grasp what they're waffling about.

pc7

we'llallhavetea wrote: »

It galz podcast is painful to listen to. What went on, <snip>?! Can't even grasp what they're waffling about.

No, 'I think' they did a podcast last year on what was consent and what was rape. They feel RT or one of her online personas pushed them to do the podcast topic (but views were their own), then someone said their podcast triggered a rape victim into an attempted suicide (with full fake family etc.). But now they realise that was all RT profiles setting it all up. They got dogs abuse for the podcast and subsequent 'suicide attempt by the person' who now seems to be RT. I think that's what they were saying. I was on a FB group last year when it all went off and it rang bells.

mrsdewinter

SozBbz wrote: »

I did read it at the time actually, no need to speak for me.
I agree that its a lazy article, thats the point I'm making all along. IMO they should have looked deeper or not published at all. I think you'd find they consider themselves a serious publication, but what they did was temporarily give a person a platform to present themselves as a purely innocent bystander. Whether or not shes BU is one thing, I think it looks likely but I'm not the police so I'm not about to go out and do some amateur detective work. I don't think its beyond the reach of a newspaper to dig a little into a persons background before publishing a story.

What tools do you think a reporter has that would allow them to 'dig into a person's background'? The facts presented to the reporter were: 1) a woman says she's been accused of being BU; 2) she's even approached the guards; 3) the guards confirm that she has spoken to them. From what I've heard about RT, she's excellent at her job and, unlike BU, she was willing to go public about her plight. There's no 'bull****ers hotline' for reporters to contact, you know. All they can work off is the facts in front of them.

SozBbz

we'llallhavetea wrote: »

It galz podcast is painful to listen to. What went on, <snip>?! Can't even grasp what they're waffling about.

Yeah they're super annoying to listen to. All the fake accents and talk of getting the "D" was giving me serious eyerolls.
However, I did think their position on this whole hoopla was interesting. I just won't be listening to their podcast again anytime soon. My advice for anyone who hasn't listened to it but wants to is to just skip the first 25 minutes.

La_Gordy

pc7 wrote: »

No, 'I think' they did a podcast last year on what was consent and what was rape. They feel RT or one of her online personas pushed them to do the podcast topic (but views were their own), then someone said their podcast triggered a rape victim into an attempted suicide (with full fake family etc.). But now they realise that was all RT profiles setting it all up. They got dogs abuse for the podcast and subsequent 'suicide attempt by the person' who now seems to be RT. I think that's what they were saying. I was on a FB group last year when it all went off and it rang bells.

Sounded to me like blame shifting. They said horrible things about rape victims and thought that was ok.

I wish I had seen someone point out the 25 minute mark to me earlier as I was waiting and waiting and all I heard was self-congratulations for the duration, with a fair amount of faux American accents and catchphrases thrown in. Then the actual segment was rambling, there was talk of their fear of acid attacks (!) and the "T" as they referred to it, was still presumption and speculation. As many of said we can all see what it points to, but that doesn't make it the definitive truth.

Flippyfloppy

pc7 wrote: »

No, 'I think' they did a podcast last year on what was consent and what was rape. They feel RT or one of her online personas pushed them to do the podcast topic (but views were their own), then someone said their podcast triggered a rape victim into an attempted suicide (with full fake family etc.). But now they realise that was all RT profiles setting it all up. They got dogs abuse for the podcast and subsequent 'suicide attempt by the person' who now seems to be RT. I think that's what they were saying. I was on a FB group last year when it all went off and it rang bells.

That podcast was convincing, even though at times it was hard to follow when one kept interrupting the other just as it sounded like they were going to say something interesting. They didn’t actually convince me that BU is definitely the person trolling them though. That’s the part everyone is conviently leaving out. I’m sure there’s plenty of trolls out their hiding anomously behind their keyboards..... from bored teenagers to jealous ex schoolmates etc.

Floppybits

<snipped>

Isn't that what is done in this country nowadays, get caught/exposed doing something and its "oh I'm sorry I was having mental health issues at the time, please forgive me and feel sorry me". Look at the "Influensers" who BU exposed saying they couldn't get out of bed for 3 days or the people that were exposed (not by BU) claiming exorbitant wages or expenses from Charities, suddenly they were suffering with anxiety and it goes on but didn't seem to suffer any issues prior to being caught. 
All these people do is take away from people who suffering real mental health issues. I have no time or respect for anyone who suddenly claims to have mental health issues when they are caught or exposed for being dishonest.

I did actually notice that the word “anxiety” popped up in a good few of the instagram accounts that I nosed through and not necessarily in posts that were recently made.

I’m actually getting bored of it all already

SozBbz

mrsdewinter wrote: »

SozBbz wrote: »

I did read it at the time actually, no need to speak for me.
I agree that its a lazy article, thats the point I'm making all along. IMO they should have looked deeper or not published at all. I think you'd find they consider themselves a serious publication, but what they did was temporarily give a person a platform to present themselves as a purely innocent bystander. Whether or not shes BU is one thing, I think it looks likely but I'm not the police so I'm not about to go out and do some amateur detective work. I don't think its beyond the reach of a newspaper to dig a little into a persons background before publishing a story.

What tools do you think a reporter has that would allow them to 'dig into a person's background'? The facts presented to the reporter were: 1) a woman says she's been accused of being BU; 2) she's even approached the guards; 3) the guards confirm that she has spoken to them. From what I've heard about RT, she's excellent at her job and, unlike BU, she was willing to go public about her plight. There's no 'bull****ers hotline' for reporters to contact, you know. All they can work off is the facts in front of them.

Um, i don't know but maybe the internet? I heard her name a good few weeks before that article came out and I'm not even on facebook or involved in any of those groups that much of this seems to circle back to. Her name has been out there for a while, so the point I'm making is that they could have looked a bit closer before writing such a one sided piece.

GingerLily

I tried listening to the other two podcasts from IT Galz, about BU and the original (bull****callerouter), there isn't really any interesting in it, I'd skip!

I'd still recommend everyone to listen to the recent episode (skip to 25 mins in), but I won't be subscribing, I appreciate that they told their experience anyway!

soiseztomabel

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

I did actually notice that the word “anxiety” popped up in a good few of the instagram accounts that I nosed through and not necessarily in posts that were recently made.

I’m actually getting bored of it all already

If influencers/bloggers/whomever get anxiety over people trolling, nit picking, people having drastically different opinions maybe opening their lives up to potentially crazy people who are online isn't necessarily the best thing for them to do....

Although this level of bullying is not alright but this whole situation will hopefully serve as a warning to naive people who aim to enter this "profession" about how this area is not all notoriety, granola, podcasts and guest spots on tv and sheds light on how it has a more sinister side.

Muahahaha

SozBbz wrote: »

She always frames asking for money as "support" so she can continue to work as a writer, when in fact is looks far more like support to fund frivolous spending.

Her Patreon account (which has 163 patrons) says "When I reach 500 patrons, I'll be able to pay my podcast producer a semi-decent fee for the work he puts into How to be Sound"

Given she is burning through 500 quid a week eating out and treating herself you would think that she might pay her podcast producer not just a "semi-decent fee" but a decent one. Her podcast is ironically called How to be Sound, I dont think it is very sound expecting people to work for free while you go out and live the life of reilly. She seems to be playing this producer guy like a mug, even putting a condition on her getting 500 patrons before he gets paid a "semi decent fee". Good lord, the sense of entitlement is strong with this one.

soiseztomabel

Muahahaha wrote: »

Her Patreon account (which has 163 patrons) says "When I reach 500 patrons, I'll be able to pay my podcast producer a semi-decent fee for the work he puts into How to be Sound"

Given she is burning through 500 quid a week eating out and treating herself you would think that she might pay her podcast producer not just a "semi-decent fee" but a decent one. Her podcast is ironically called How to be Sound, I dont think it is very sound expecting people to work for free while you go out and live the life of reilly. She seems to be playing this producer guy like a mug, even putting a condition on her getting 500 patrons before he gets paid a "semi decent fee". Good lord, the sense of entitlement is strong with this one.

Not fully true.... She bought him an Eddie Rockets (with milkshake) a few times according to some of her diaries.

"How to be sound"..

Jesus..

soiseztomabel

soiseztomabel wrote: »

Not fully true.... She bought him and Eddie Rockets (with milkshake) a few times according to some of her diaries.

Yeah.... me, Rosemary and Eddie are best buds and you patreons always pay!

ibarelycare

RhubarbCrumble wrote: »

Only heard of this one recently. Leah Roberts. Missing person. Very unusual case.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Leah_Roberts

What's that got to do with this thread?

RhubarbCrumble

ibarelycare wrote: »

What's that got to do with this thread?

Oops! So sorry. Meant to post in the unsolved mysteries thread. Can a mod delete please? Apologies.