How I Made a Twat of Myself on Twitter

I actually was following your Tweets in real time and, while understanding why you apologized, thought you had an excellent point. The criticisms of you were not only over the top but off the mark. Given those distances it is no wonder you trended in Dublin.

It is a fair critique to point out the BBC was reporting from the comparatively comfortable surroundings of the media hotel. As supporting evidence, Sky was reporting from the field so it's not a case of asking the impossible; clearly it was possible since others were doing it. Media bubbles are reputedly little different in these areas as they are at party conferences or campaign buses (cf. "With Hostage and Hijacker in Beirut" by P.J. O'Rourke). And the "Elf 'n Safety" dig is quite keeping in recent revelations on how the BBC conducts business (cf. "Are you sitting comfortably? BBC employs 'chair champion' in Salford HQ" - The Telegraph 14 Jun 2011). That the coverage missed Moussa Ibrahim’s press conference live would add to the suspicions that the BBC was covering the story in a rather perfunctory manner which, given that until recently (institutionally) there was no point of comparison, makes perfect sense.

The comments from the journalists are rather off the mark as well. "Your war reporting record" or lack thereof is irrelevant. This is a neat trick all professionals use to immunize themselves to criticism. "How many heart operations have you performed" or "how many five-star restaurants have you been head chef at" are both pointed questions. Yet, if the patient dies or the patrons become ill one does need any specialized training to see the failure. Their criticism is invalid even before we start looking and the circular logic of sending a journalist on a dangerous story and then arguing for his maximum safety.

My turn to apologize. I hadn't meant to get on my soap box nor destroy an otherwise beautiful midwestern summer's evening writing long winded commentary on a British blog site. But as someone who has worked in the technical department of some noted publications their sensibilities have seeped into me enough that I despise the increasing use of the "heckler's veto". I fully understand why you needed to apologize: you could not repeatedly justify your comments in the coming days given that you were not 100% sure of their validity. But I hope that the next time you hesitate to press the tweet button you will swallow hard and proceed. This is the only remedy to the anodyne gossip which passes for "journalism" in our age: Tweet and be damned!

I was following you too Iain and you said nothing worse than 100s of other people

As late as 11:00 the latest on @BBCBreaking was 48 hours old, more like @BBCBroken

Chin up old chap, I don't hold it against you

No you didn't. It was a fair point, but your ad hominem attack on the reporter 'Who is this wimp ... ?' left you open to the ad hominem attacks from the Twitter Trolls and undermined your point. I've stopped watching or listening to any news on the BBC as it's often well behind the curve, or analysed only from a lefty-liberal perspective.

Errr...hang on. You stopped blogging because of the insults. Now you 'threaten' (apropos the link to Mr Barkes) to stop tweeting because you got slagged off for getting it wrong? Man up, chap, man up!!

Ellie, I haven't threatened to stop tweeting at all.

@tlillis4 One point you are correct - not having done something oneself does not prevent one from being able to criticise.

However, using as the analogy of chairs in Salford is absurd - consider instead the BBC's coverage of conflict worldwide, or the clip doing the roudns today in which a BBC reporter in Tripoli came under fire while in a convoy - which demonstrates they are far less averse to risk-taking than your point suggests.

The original comment was based on ignorance - the security situation within the capital varied dramatically - and also incredibly disrespectful particularly in light of the number of journalists who have been killed covering the conflict in Libya this year (and journalists in conflicts across the world).

At the same time, credit for realising your mistake and apologising. It's a shame this wasn't an end to the matter. Hopefully Iain will act the same way if someone else, particularly if it's someone he disagrees withm makes the same mistake (if they apologise as well). It's not just twitter - think of the media response to "gaffes" pre-Twitter days that stifles fair and open debate

Iain, I do not know how else I can communicate with the site administrators, but I should like to advise that the pale (very pale) grey text is for me almost illegible. Would it be asking too much to ask for a heavier font colour please?

In many ways social media has made people cold and distant. It has also given some the belief that they can behave appallingly and say things that they would never dare say to your face.

So what? You made a mistake. Instead of someone politely pointing this out to you they hurl vile abuse your way from the safe distance of their keyboard. These people are pathetic.

It goes beyond being slagged off. If you work in this business you put your head above the parapet frequently and folk will always take potshots.

Increasingly Twitter is becoming the home of those just waiting for an opportunity to be as unpleasant as possible and join in the next wave of moral outrage. But these days much of it is not justified or rational. It is simply an opportunity for some vile people to treat someone in a very nasty way.

You really do take yourself far too seriously.

tillis,

Any of us who have been about online for a while occasionally screw up. It's no big deal. It's always been a blunt speaking place, and Iain is well capable of standing up for himself.

Sky must have won the ratings game even though it was AlJaz who consistently delivered the real news meat of the night, consistently and accurately.

And, not for the first time recently, I was disappointed with the Beeb's performance. But let's remember these guys were embedded with military units. Both in the rebel and the govt sides.

The Beeb journo was effectively under armed guard, Alex had armed protection. That, I imagine, is why, when he realised the coarse dimensions of the actualite, Iain apologised forthwith.

There's a worrying trend for people to treat real world events as though they were real time entertainment, and decrying a failure to serve up the televised revolution to their own personal tastes.

I'm with Lord Reith that regard!

Time for a spot of Gil Scott Heron! ow.ly/699KH