He is also a tweeter who today engaged in what I consider to be an extraordinary act of misleading people aimed at another blogger, Tim Ireland (@bloggerheads). Looking at their respective timelines Cole and Ireland have been engaged in a very public and personal spat. I know nothing of the background to this, but Cole claims in his timeline he was emailed photos that were fake as part of an "attempted sting". The whole exchange is there for anyone interested in it to read.
What interests me, however, are these two tweets. They simply speak for themselves:
The meaning of this is very clear. The second part of the sentence is the key part - the allegation is that Cole is "protecting a bastard" who has apparently been targeting Tim Ireland's wife and family.
The tweet was then taken by Cole and retweeted in the following form:
The meaning? Again in my view it could not be clearer. If you were one of Cole's 12,171 followers (who had also happened not to have seen Ireland's original tweet) you would naturally think that Ireland (@bloggerheads) had alleged that Cole has been targeting Ireland's wife and family.
Having amended the tweet to completely change its meaning, Cole then responds to the allegation, which he has himself fabricated, by denying it. He then throws in a personal insult, as his style, for good measure.
What of it? Well it is one thing to have differences of political opinion on Twitter. But to actually change someone's words in a brazen misleading way to score points, and to then send this completely misleading tweet out to your thousands of followers? It's pretty low. It does absolutely nothing to get over any form of constructive political argument. And it's quite likely to be defamatory towards Ireland.
Of course it's possible that Cole "innocently" amended the tweet because there wasn't space to put his insult about Ireland's wife in the 140 characters... and that therefore this wasn't a deliberate attempt to mislead. However, reading these two tweets I can't myself help thinking that Tory Bear is not just a bully boy with lots of followers, who likes insulting those he disagrees with, but that he's also a misleading, dishonest liar.
No wonder Sarah Ditum of the Guardian commented on Cole's behaviour previously:
"This is the sort of tiresome nasty-party stuff that the Tories are officially keen to leave behind, but that dominates in many of their vigorous internet representatives."
There's also his reference to a 'dribbling retard' in his earlier tweet about Ed Milliband.
ReplyDeleteCharming little wretch isn't he?
Harry, probably learning from Guido, does this rather silly, transparent thing - I don't know if it's subconscious, but I'll assume it's not based on the fact he seemed to start doing it a lot more since he joined Guido's blog.
ReplyDeleteHe'll usually debate for as long as he thinks he has it all under control. As soon as things begin to turn around, he stops replying and starts "mentioning" - ie, dropping the persons name into the middle of his response, rather than just hitting reply. This a) Means it makes it nearly impossible for people to trace the entire conversation in the future, and b) acts as a call to action to the more idiotic of his followers. Check it out - he does it all-the-time.
Guido does it too, but to be fair to him, I think that's more out of smugness. Guido has the intelligence to debate, whereas Harry - well, judge for yourself by the insults. In any real life debating situation, he'd be laughed out of the room.
Thanks for taking the time. I'll be blogging the detail of the damaging material Harry Cole claims I fabricated against myself (based on a single unnamed "reliable source" who he claims says so) as soon as I am able. Bedfordshire Police investigated its origins (until they hit a dead end) because it appeared during the investigation that Dorries worked so hard for, so I while I really need Harry Cole to cooperate in order to investigate this fabricated evidence as a matter of some urgency (and it looks like I'm reduced to having to shame him into it, ffs) I have to dot my Is and cross my Ts on any published detail.
ReplyDeleteNumbers man I will happily publicly debate you.
ReplyDeletePeter, I like a lot of what you write so was sad to see this one. The tweet was done at the heat of the moment and does fall more into your latter suggestion of space. So furious at the ridiculous allegation of the original tweet that on reflection I should probably have stopped and retweeted the original in whole at first. However the allegation that I was somehow threatening to his wife and kids is and remains bs. As I went on to explain in further tweets, Ireland is deluded with his giant conspiratorial web, that I'm frankly bored of being slightly tangled in. I stand by my denial of his assertions and am more annoyed I broke the first and second rules of Tim Ireland club. Engaging.
As for KerryOut, that raised a couple of grand and Sarah Ditum can jog on in my book, that piece was a hatchet job with Kerry's fingerprints all over it.
I think the benefit of the doubt should be given to Harry for amending the tweet on space grounds... a simple clarification would have sufficed. The fact he then insults Tim afterwards is probably the golden bullet which makes one think it was a vindictive misrepresentation of Tim's words.
ReplyDeletePME200
ReplyDeleteOf course it's possible that Cole "innocently" amended the tweet because there wasn't space to put his insult about Ireland's wife in the 140 characters... and that therefore this wasn't a deliberate attempt to mislead.
Cole
The tweet was done at the heat of the moment and does fall more into your latter suggestion of space.
I think you misinterpreted his comment...
However the allegation that I was somehow threatening to his wife and kids is and remains bs.
Tim didn't made such a claim.
Harry Coles claims I fabricated evidence against myself and sent it directly to him by email. But he will not produce the email he claims I sent him.
ReplyDeleteI have explained its importance. Harry Cole engages again with the straw man of his own creation, but, if we were to argue what he claims is the point for a moment, he could be accurately described as adding to the danger only so far as he is refusing to cooperate with a matter that could lead to the successful prosecution of a person who has been targeting me personally, and my wife and family, just to get at me. Why would anyone protect such a person? What possible reason can Harry Cole have for refusing to send me the content and headers of an email he claims I sent him?
"However the allegation that I was somehow threatening to his wife and kids is and remains bs"
ReplyDeleteBut the point of Peter's piece is that no such allegation was made so your denial is meaningless. However, anybody who sees your tweet in isolation will assume the worst.
You're smearing by denial.
That I am in anyway protecting someone and thus a threat to your family is a crock Tim.
ReplyDeleteThat is the allegation you made and that is my denial. Again.
I won't be drawn into another one of your absurd compulsive tirades. If you write anything about you have your denial from me. DYB.
Dumbfounded he's adhering to the straw man.
ReplyDeleteHarry Cole, I will ask you again for the email you claim I sent you. Content and headers.
You allege I am the author based on what you admit to be nothing but hearsay from a single source. You have also been advised publicly and through back channels that he author is a dangerous person. Police were advised of the following by a medical professional they interviewed as part of their investigation, and I was present when it was said; the medication involved is a carefully controlled substance to the extent that you cannot pick up even an empty box like it by digging through bins at the back of Boots; the original picture that was used for this forgery was most likely accessed by someone who had been prescribed this medication, or enjoyed a position of trust with someone who had been prescribed this medication.
I want that data. Do you seriously deny it to me out of malice or anger over some real or perceived difference of opinion?
Harry Cole: Everybody can see that you changed the tweet from @bloggerheads to manipulate it for your own reasons... that I can't imagine.
ReplyDeleteSo your denial, man, is hollow and really kinda stupid.
Harry Cole "That I am in anyway protecting someone and thus a threat to your family is a crock Tim. "
ReplyDeleteWell, based on your own writings, this would be easy to prove. Just produce the evidence you claim to have.
It's very simple:
ReplyDelete1. An unstable and possibly dangerous individual with a grudge against Tim decided to send a fake pic to individuals likely to be hostile to him.
2. Cole decided to make use of the communication from this person to smear Tim with a false accusation of trying to "sting" him with a fake.
3. It was explained to Cole that this was a serious matter that already involved the police, and that any help he could give with email metadata might assist with bringing this individual - who has also referenced Tim's family in other messages - to justice.
4. Cole throws up a smokescreen of faux-outrage by claiming he's been accused of going after Tim's family himself, and refuses to cooperate out of spite.
If Cole can't see what's wrong with that something must have gone very wrong somewhere in his past. Hopefully when he grows up a bit he'll be ashamed of himself (although it's unlikely given his current middle-aged role models).
Forget about debating, it seems that Cole had problems even reading. In the comments here he's still furiously denying something that he was never accused of.
ReplyDeleteI don't really know what's going on here, and who's in the right. I'm willing to admit I may be biased; I've met Harry a couple of times in RL, and he seems very likeable, and my only interaction with Tim Ireland (on Twitter) suggested that he is obsessive, vindictive and graceless.
ReplyDeleteIn any case, what I find really bizarre in this post was the notion that Tories are somehow nastier online than lefties. There is no evidence whatsoever for this view. Try engaging with Sunny Hundal, for instance, or with any of the "evidence-based policy" groupies around Goldacre et al., or reading the #dorries hashtag after Nadine Dorries appears on TV.
Nastiness is a human characteristic, not a right-wing one.
That's an interesting interpretation, Niall. I do not know the ins and outs of the background, either, as I state.
ReplyDeleteYou are absolutely correct that nastiness can come from any quarter. This post, however, does not "somehow" seek to make the assertion that Tories are nastier online than lefties. It is far from my style to make such sweeping, silly comments, which of course are impossible to substantiate with any evidence based approach.
Sarah Ditum's comment is a specific one which relates to Cole and his previous well known behaviour online. I do think it a bit naive to suggest that there is not a wider perception issue about some bloggers on the right upholding the "nasty party" stereotype, but to suggest it is unique to them is a form of projection by you that is not my intention.
I have simply flagged up here what I witnessed yesterday as a specific and blatant wrong-doing by a very high profile blogger, provided my analysis of it, and given an opinion. I appreciate Harry Cole's polite response but personally view it as quite odd that he continues the substantive allegation in his comments.
Other than in a very tongue in cheek and light-hearted way, I don't see politics as something to approach in a slavish, football team way ("He's a [Tory, Lib Dem or Labour], therefore he must be right so I'll take his side regardless of the facts"). I'm afraid that's how I read your comment and response to the blog. It is hard objectively to look at the modified tweet and say "I don't know who's in the right" in this particular instance.
What we all see as a result of the "football team" mentality - which comes from all sides - is a lot of pettiness, unnecessary nastiness and lack of engaging constructively in the matters at hand. It is sadly the reason so many people are entirely turned off by the political world.
As a narrative, this fails on many levels. Sure, paint one guy as the good guy, and the other as the baddy, so we know there is a drama going on. But making the baddy badder, and the goody gooder means your audience is feed a diet of pure saccharine. The goody has to do something bad, or the baddy do something good, for anyone to be able draw any decent moral message from this piece.
ReplyDeleteI suggest you take a look at the parable of the Good Samaritan, and do a re-draft.
I've often engaged with Sunny Hundal, and I find him perfectly pleasant. But, then, we support the same team (to use Peter's analogy).
ReplyDeleteI've no doubt Harry C is charming in real life - most people are, especially in the presence of people they feel comfortable with. But as we all know one's online personality can be very different - and one may say things online which one would never say to someone's face. It's not right, but it's a fact.
Harry's closing line on the quoted tweet is childish and nasty, there's simply no getting round that fact. It has no place in any serious discussion, which Tim (notwithstanding his use of the word "scumbag") is obviously trying to have.
I've no idea what Martin (above) is going on about.
I didn't mean to engage in this in a tribal way :-( Sorry if it came across that way. As I said, I'm perfectly willing to accept that I'm biased because of my interactions with both TI and HC. I'm not a Tory, and I certainly don't see this as a "protect my team" exercise. On the face of it, HC is in the wrong, but I simply note that based on what I've seen of TI, there may - note, may - be more than this than meets to the eye.
ReplyDeletesjcoltrane - Sunny Hundal is generally very nice to people on his team! It's being nice to "the other lot" that is really the measure (FWIW, lots of rightwingers on Twitter fall down here on this too).
The issue is that Cole is lying about the "sting", lying about Tim accusing him of going after his family, and out of spite is refusing to share evidence relevant to a police investigation. The fact that someone finds Cole "likable" and Tim "graceless" is neither here nor there
ReplyDeleteVery well, Niall. Unlike Harry Cole I am willing to have the specifics subjected to scrutiny. Other than material I'd like to check with police first, what is is about my request for this information that you think requires scrutiny?
ReplyDelete@Harry Cole
ReplyDeleteI can't even begin to describe the irony of the fact that I said "judge for yourself by the insults. In any real life debating situation, he'd be laughed out of the room" and you answered the question as if I'd said "I'll beat you in a debate". You then go on to claim you made the earlier mistake "in the heat of the moment"
Being asked a question, and answering one you made up. Sound familiar? You never learn, do you?
Harry Cole has done himself no favours with his responses here. He's demonstrated that he's either malicious (repeating obviously false allegations)or too stupid to understand a straightforward message.
ReplyDeleteAnd the personal insults in his tweets are gratuitously offensive.