So, Yes Scotland’s failure is my fault….even though they’ve altered their site

Apparently, if I don’t like the fact that Yes Scotland want to take my photo, stick it on their site & imply I’m backing them, I should ‘gie’s some peace’ and stop following Yes Scotland’s Twitter account. That’s the feedback I got from one Nationalist tweeter. Here’s a novel idea – why don’t they simply stop misrepresenting people’s views. It’s quite simple! The number of e-mails circulating with variations of the theme ‘cheeky so and sos’ between people in the same boat has been quite amusing. It takes some nerve to manipulate the intention of people who have legitimate professional or political reasons for keeping tabs on them. The Yes Campaign have tonight issued a statement: is open to all people who want to find out about the many benefits of an independent Scotland, including 15,000 supporters who have already signed the Yes Declaration and followers, people of ‘independent mind’, who are not counted as supporters, and who have connected with Yes Scotland through our website, Facebook page or twitter account simply to find out more.”

This is garbage. There is no distinction on the site between followers and supporters and they should remove the Twitter photos until only those who have signed up as supporters or signed the Declaration of Cineworld are shown. Interesting, too, that only 15,000 have signed when SNP has over 20,000 members.

  G’s Spot has Willie Rennie’s reaction:

They tried to rig the referendum, now they are rigging the website.   “Following an individual or group on Twitter should not be misrepresented as support.   “The Yes Scotland website fails to make this distinction and implies that everyone who follows the campaign supports the campaign.   “This is an underhanded way to pad out numbers to make it look like more people support the break-up of the UK than is actually the case.” 

 Thing is, this lot have form on, er, portraying the most optimistic view of their support. Remember when it was revealed that the Scottish Government’s consultation was accepting multiple anonymous responses? 

They have now changed their site to add in that the pictures represent people following on Facebook & Twitter. I don’t think that’s enough. A Twitter follow is like a tracking device. A Facebook like is, for me, more of a statement of positive intent. That’s not how others see it, though, as the feedback I’ve had on Twitter suggests that others use Facebook likes as another way to find out what’s going on. To put it beyond doubt, Yes Scotland should restrict the photo sharing to those who signed the Declaration of Cineworld. That would be the honest thing to do.

About caronlindsay

Scottish Lib Dem internationalist, mum, LGBT+ ally, Doctor Who, Strictly, F1 and trashy tv addict and blogger. Servant to two spaniels. She/her.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to So, Yes Scotland’s failure is my fault….even though they’ve altered their site

  1. I remember a similar thing happening on the No 2 AV website last year. It was quite hilarious at one point when 75 of the individual avatars had the Yes logo in the corner when I took a screen shot. A number of them were on staff.


  2. Munguin says:

    Just imagine if they had not used twitter feeds to provide photos. You and Willie Rennie and what is left of the Lib Dem diaspora would not be able to get yourselves into a self-righteous funk and claim that they were “rigging” the declaration. Funny way to rig anything by errr publishing exactly the number of people who have actually signed it. Hardly the Robert Mugabe school of rigging anything then is it?

    Is it not part of politics to portray the most optimistic view of things? I did not notice the Lib Dems going into the local elections recently with anything like a realistic view of just how badly you were going to do. Why we even had the ever optimistic Willie Rennie here in Dundee “targeting” council seats and telling us all that he was confident of taking a council seat in the Ferry ward after all the positive feed-back he was getting on the doorsteps. Does that come under putting a positive slant on things or just down right lying?

    If you remember the English government’s consultation run by Lib Dem SOS Michael Moore was vetted for “quality” and half of the responses it accepted were standard answers from a Labour run website. Will that come under the bracket of putting a “positive” slant on things? Or is it ok for Moore and Labour to rig things under your own definition but not the SNP? Caron before you look up D for desperate in your dictionary perhaps you should flick to H for hypocrisy!


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 )

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.