Twitter reaction to political violence

The attack on James Shaw prompted many and varied comments on Twitter. It has been claimed and reported there were some despicable tweets. This one got a lot of attention:

That’s an awful attempt to justify the attack on Shaw. There have probably been others, but I’m not going to go looking for them.

But that tweet raised another string of condemnations. It was pointed out that @MattKingMP followed the above account, and that was questioned and condemned.

Should MPs (or anyone) be criticised for who they follow on Twitter? In some cases that would be justified. But some people go out of there way to find some way of linking political opponents to negative news.

I follow about 400 people on Twitter. Some of those have probably at some time said crappy things. I used to follow @WhaleOil and @laudafinem (until they blocked me), not because I support them but because I wanted to track what they were saying. I still follow @kiwiblog and @thestandard, things have been said at the related blogs that I have condemned.

It’s difficult to monitor everything that is said on Twitter by people you follow. It depends on time (I don’t have Twitter available all the time) and it also depends on what Twitter displays on your feed.

I think that MPs have greater problems with this. The aim of social media is to connect to as many people as possible, some people rate popularity depending on number of follows and followers and tweets. It’s a flawed measurement, but it happens.

And most MPs won’t have the time to carefully check Twitter and especially check or know what every account they follow  is saying and has said.

But MPs leave themselves open to criticism because some people will look for whatever they can to dump on them.

There are no easy answers.

Another angle on Twitter to the Shaw assault was this thread from Neale Jones:

He may make some fair points (and possibly some unfair ones. Important issues are raised but the timing and link to Shaw makes it look like political opportunism to attack those politicians he frequently and strongly criticises.

Leave a comment


  1. Ray

     /  15th March 2019

    It never fails to amaze me how being a left supporter means you have absolutely no memory.
    They act as if this despicable attack on James Shaw is a first, completely forgetting all those attacks on National Party PMs & MPs.
    Ok,a lump of mud at Waitangi, jostling or a dildo are not a punch in the face but none are them are amusing either.

  2. duperez

     /  15th March 2019

    ‘Gary Gharamasala’ is to be congratulated in being so open, positive and forthright. He reckons if you think someone is ‘ruining the country’ it’s reasonable to confront them in the street and slap some sense into them.

    That’s the good old-fashioned approach, not the slapping bit, but telling it like you see it. The new-fashioned way is that I can’t ask the question, “What would ‘Gary Gharamasala’ say to the idea that using his logic he could expect a gang of bovver boys and girls to assail him in the street and slap some sense into his head?” I can’t ask that because there’s bound to be someone who’d say that’s an implied threat and I’d have the law enforcement authorities knocking on my door to slap some sense into my head, metaphorically of course.

    ‘Gharamasala’ is simply a tiny example of the toxicity of political discourse in the country. And an example of how media can be used to spread stuff without being open, a way to be anonymous and ignorant.

    A couple of other contributions from one person yesterday:

    “They (Green Party) have all been told to go and hug a tree…..Then go home and rest.”
    “Wonder who the next Greenie will be to get a little slap?”
    “This Green party is falling apart. This stunt by Shaw will will ruin him if it is proven to be a stunt.”
    “Let’s be honest…Shaw is a bit creepy and he pisses a lot of people off. If he is going to say and do things that affect peoples (sic) jobs and families then don’t (sic) be surprised if people want to punch him.”

  3. Griff.

     /  15th March 2019

    I note the number of comments DPF deleted on the KB thread.
    DPF is an enabler when he fails to keep his so called comments policy by just deleting such crap from his RWNJ’s yet gives the few sane commenters strikes for less legally actionable comments.

  4. PartisanZ

     /  15th March 2019

    Neale Jones got it right: ” … cause for deep reflection from those who promoted and legitimised the UN Global Compact conspiracy theory.” … some of whom are very present here on YNZ …

    • Corkyu

       /  15th March 2019

      Yep.. I have been waiting for that post. And unfortunately these type of nuts make any slim chance of MSM actually looking in detail at the many agenda’s the UN has going, almost nil.

      BTW..what is the ‘UN Global Compact conspiracy theory,’ Parti?

      • PartisanZ

         /  15th March 2019

        Question unworthy of a reply … Dunno why I bother … You know full well … (You either subscribe to it or you wrote it) …

        “Foot in the door” leading to global dictatorship of immigration numbers …

        • Corky

           /  15th March 2019

          So, what’s the conspiracy? It’s a fair question to ask given we must accept Mark Taylor back because as Andy Little says we have signed up to a UN convention.

          Its fair to surmise the Compact is a first step in the door..

          Here’s a real conspiracy.

          • PartisanZ

             /  15th March 2019

            Oh God yes Corky … What a terrible, terrible thing “a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action” is?

            How dare humans identify such a need or priority … Honestly, HOW DARE THEY?

            Just let the military-industrial-agribusiness-political elitists continue on their way … including laying Chem-Trails to ‘control’ the weather and shield the population from the reality of Climate Change …

            The UN convention Andrew Little is referring to IS NOT the UN Immigration Compact … We’ve signed up to dozens of UN “conventions” … Mark Taylor holds a NZ Passport …

            Who’s behind ‘Wake Up NZ’?

            There’s a real problem IMHO with lumping all conspiracy theories onto one site like that …

            What do ‘Wake Up NZ’ers’ want? Eugenics – for say Islamists – without Eugenics being applied to Woke Up NZ’ers? Eugenics for the Left but not for the Right?

            … Oh but the Right are the threat … Oh … No they’re not … The Left are!?

            How much do you get paid for this Trolling?

  5. Tipene

     /  15th March 2019

    It occurs to me that if a Govt pushes a civil society long enough and hard enough in a direction they don’t want to go, then eventually there is going to be some blow-back.

    Was this an act of wanton violence, or simply the law of natural consequence in action?

    • Gezza

       /  15th March 2019

      Probably just a confirmation that Auckland isn’t the only place with boof heads.

    • PartisanZ

       /  15th March 2019

      How far do you want to take that justification …?

      You’re not a “rule of law” sorta guy then?

      So when the poor and disenfranchised Precariat created by neoliberalism finally revolt I guess it will be okay?

    • High Flying Duck

       /  15th March 2019

      Violence is not really a “natural consequence” of anything other than if you are physically provoked.
      I hardly think the UN migration pact, whatever your views on it, was of a level to trigger a popular uprising.

  1. Twitter reaction to political violence — Your NZ – NZ Conservative Coalition

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s