IT is depressing, telling and damning that the immediate response when Sarah Smith, the BBC’s former Scotland Editor, claimed she had been subjected to “bile, hatred and misogyny” during her time in the job was a torrent of further abuse. Not merely from the anonymous trolls of social media, from whom one expects nothing else, but, disgracefully, from politicians. The MSP James Dornan accused Ms Smith of imagining the whole thing, and the former MP Phil Boswell called her a “traitor”.
The SNP should be ashamed to have senior party figures voicing such repugnant sentiments – incidentally, solid evidence of the behaviour Ms Smith complains of – and disown them. Independence cannot help being a highly divisive issue, but no political belief, however deeply felt, can justify intolerant bullying and personal attack.
But, though a small minority of nationalists have a particular problem in this area, the decline of civilised public discourse is widespread, and confined neither to Scotland nor supporters of a Yes vote. It now seems almost impossible for some people (on every side of these questions) to take a rational approach to Brexit, Covid restrictions, vaccine mandates, transgender issues and a slew of other important political and cultural faultlines.
Too often a political or ideological difference of any sort is instead seen as licence to hector, harass and harangue, to encourage “pile-ons”, pitchfork mentality and personal abuse, and even calls for people to lose their jobs, be “cancelled” or silenced, or suggestions that violence should be directed at them.
This is not about obvious jokes or hyperbole; it rises far above fierce debate or even the occasionally rude rough and tumble to be expected when people take sharply different views. It is about real, vindictive assaults that have a direct impact on mental health and even physical safety.
Lest we forget, two MPs in English constituencies (one Labour and one Tory, though their own politics ought to be entirely irrelevant) have been murdered in recent years; both the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition have faced unacceptable abuse, far beyond reasonable protest, on the streets in the past couple of weeks.
A few moments online will provide plenty of evidence of similar vitriol directed at the First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, much of it rooted not in political points but of a highly offensive personal nature. Sadly, misogyny, as well as the old stalwarts of racism, anti-Semitism and religious bigotry, is quite often a feature of these cowardly denunciations.
The ability to conduct rational and civil discussions, even if they involve vehement disagreement or condemnation of an opposing position, is a sine qua non of liberal democracy. Robust criticism of broadcasters and politicians is perfectly reasonable, as is the freedom to express any legal opinion, but the kind of abuse now prevalent goes well beyond the acceptable, and should be tackled head-on. Attacks unacceptable in public spaces are equally indefensible online.
Social media outlets and, in some cases, the police have been inconsistent in handling this issue, clamping down on trivial comments or ill-founded complaints, while ignoring toxic and vicious attacks that endanger individuals and corrode the very basis of civil society. That must change.
CONGRATULATIONS to the GB curling teams on their spectacular results at the Winter Olympics. Both the men's and women's teams have reached the finals, the latter after a nail-biting finish yesterday. Over the weekend they challenge Sweden and Japan respectively for the gold, with a silver medal already assured. A win for either team would be Great Britain’s first gold in the sport since 2002 at Salt Lake City.
Scotland, with its already dominant record, can take particular pride in this achievement, not only because Scots make up both teams and a third of the athletes in Team GB as a whole, but because every stone sent down the rink in Beijing started off its journey on Ailsa Craig. We send our best wishes to the Olympians, hoping today’s the day that curling’s coming home.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel