Was the campaign against Jan Moir that crashed the PCC website “heavily orchestrated”? Jan Moir herself thinks so. Was it “organised”? The deputy editor of the Telegraph said it was.
If this was the case, who was organising this? “The big gay who runs the internet“? Stephen Fry?
And what do they mean by organised?
Let’s start with 3 definitions:
- Functioning within a formal structure, as in the coordination and direction of activities.
- Affiliated in an organization, especially a union.
- Efficient and methodical.
Of the 3 descriptions, the only one that might apply in this case is the third, and here’s the rub. Imagine the Jan Moir fuss in a world without Twitter: here’s how it unfolded:
- Some people read the Jan Moir article and are offended; they forward it to their friends to express disgust.
- People complain to the PCC. They also complain to advertisers.
- After a while the expressions of disgust reach a celebrity, and a columnist.
- The celebrity mentions the article during a public appearance; the columnist writes a column about it. The columnist mentions the parts of the Press Complaints Commission code that the article breaks. Politicians pick it up too.
- More people complain. They also complain to advertisers.
- The ‘offence’ over the article now becomes a story in itself; the celebrity angle is key to selling the story.
- More people complain. They also complain to advertisers.
In a world without Twitter the above might unfold over a series of days. The difference in a world with Twitter is that the above process is accelerated beyond the ability of many people to see, and they think Step 4 is where it begins.
But why does it matter if it’s organised?
But of course this isn’t about definitions, but about the discourse of what ‘organised’ means in this context. It means ‘not spontaneous’; it means ‘not genuine’; it means ‘not valid’.
Although different people may have different (oppositional, negotiated) readings I would argue this is the dominant one, where the discourse of ‘organised’ is being used to marginalise the protests. I will make a bet here that the PCC use that discourse in how they deal with the record numbers of complaints.
Stef Lewandowski hit the nail on the head when he said that it sounded “like the argument from design applied to social media”.
Help me investigate this
But what would be really interesting here is to test the hypotheses against some evidence: I want to see just how organised the ‘campaign’ was. How important were the celebrities and the formal organisations?
I’m using Help Me Investigate to see if we can work out what level of organisation there was in the campaign. So far, thanks to Kevin Sablan we have a key part of the evidence: all the #janmoir tweets since October 14. And some suggestions on how to analyse that from Ethan Zuckerman (who’s been here before): “grab all #janmoir tweets, do word freq. analysis esp on RTs, look to see if it’s grassroots or one instigator, amplified…”
If you need an invite, let me know.
And if you have any ideas how you can measure the organisation of a campaign like this, I’d welcome them.

58 Comments
I suspect that the BBC is rather pleased about this, having suffered themselves, when the Mail whipped up controversy for a radio show that very few people had actually heard.(Sachgate) You might say the Mail orchestrated this. Revenge tastes good eh Auntie Beeb?
I read the article while doing me daily review of the papers early in the morning on Friday. Saw the article and could not believe my eyes! I was able to complain to the PCC without anyone having to point me in their direction! I also posted a comment on the article itself. It was only much later in the day I logged on to twitter and saw it was trending. I did tweet a few friends with links to the article, but left them to make their own minds up about it.
Ed, thanks for the suggestion of testing – would welcome any more help you may be able to offer in doing that. My email is paul at onlinejournalismblog dot com.
Of course it was organized, they’ve no kids to raise, so they’ve nothing better to do.
is that a joke Sepian?
I saw a tweet from a friend first then Stephen fry’s. I then went back to the friends tweet which had the url. I tweeted myself after reading the article without a url as i didn’t want to fund the daily mail’s ad coffers.
I take offense that i was ‘organised’ I don’t tend to tweet about everything I read.
I never used the hashtag. the piece was appalling and there are alot of people who don’t like the Daily Mail
I’m an American and even I was aware of the outrage before I saw Stephen’s tweet. He does have a lot of followers and I’m sure they made up a good percentage of the outraged but he’s not the only one spreading the news. I saw quite a few articles/blogs/message board posts about it. But I agree, what difference does it make? No one is going to go to the bother to ring anyone up if they don’t find it offensive even if Mr Fry tells them to.
I think many commentators are missing the point.
I complained to the PCbloodyC, not because someone told me to on Twitter or Facebook.
What I wanted and what I wrote to the
PCbloodyC was for them to record the breadth and depth of feeling against the article. Because homophobia, like racism should be challenged.
But did I think it would change the Ms Moir/DM’s views? No.
Did I think it would force some kind of apology? No.
Did I think the PCbloodyC would even look at my complaint. No. (Of course I knew before even putting finger to keypad that the PCbloodyC does not consider complaints unless you are directly affected by the story – just don’t even get me started on the uselessness of the PCbloodyC!!)
Did I by submitting a complaint want to prevent the freedom of Ms Moir (I bet she hates “Ms”) to express such views? No.
Did I think that all the time I was venting my fury to the PCbloodyC that the DM was absolutely loving this and even as I furiously typed away, Ms Moir was being hauled before her lord and master (and BTW PCbloodyC member) Paul Dacre not to be censured for such folly but for him to congratulate her on a rabble-rousing-job-well-done, and “here, have a bonus this month”. Abso-kin-lutely.
8 Trackbacks
[...] In response, HelpMeInvestigate.com, the crowd-sourced journalism site in beta, has launched an investigation into the nature of the campaign: just how ‘organised’ was the #janmoir / Jan Moir campaign, it asks. [...]
[...] lots of it is very cogent. But perhaps this, tweeted on Friday afternoon, deals with it [...]
[...] http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2009/10/19/how-organised-was-the-jan-moir-campaign/The celebrity mentions the article during a public appearance; the columnist writes a column about it. The columnist mentions the parts of the Press Complaints Commission code that the article breaks. Politicians pick it up too. More people complain. …. In response, HelpMeInvestigate.com, the crowd-sourced journalism site in beta, has launched an investigation into the nature of the campaign: just how ‘organised’ was the #janmoir / Jan Moir campaign, it asks. [...] … [...]
[...] University, investigates the orchestration on Help me investigate… and points out: “…of course this isn’t about definitions, but about the discourse of what ‘organise…“Jan MoirDigital mediaTwitterDaily MailNewspapersNational newspapersStephen GatelyMercedes [...]
[...] In response, HelpMeInvestigate.com, the crowd-sourced journalism site in beta, has launched an investigation into the nature of the campaign: just how ‘organised’ was the #janmoir / Jan Moir campaign, it asks. [...]
[...] Irish edition distancing itself from the London paper’s columnist this morning, and some of the media’s smarter minds putting to the test Moir’s claim that the fury over her column was actually “heavily orchestrated”. Not like the Mail to [...]
[...] The insanely militarised, Cold-War conditioned generation that dominates Western politics accept authority. It is the governing principle of their entire society; if an editor prints something it must be true or They wouldn’t “let him” say those things. The impetus for the re-engagement of young people in politics comes in part from the creation of a voice that circumvents the Establishment. The issue is about citizen journalism, just like it was for the Founding Fathers. It’s about education: American youth is increasingly finding this for itself, online, after decades of inadequate public schooling, crippled in its turn by religious bigotry. The ball game now is about things like this. [...]
[...] quickly. Look at what happened to Robert Scoble when he posted something inaccurate; or to Jan Moir when she wrote something people felt was in bad taste. That accountability didn’t exist in the formal structures of mainstream [...]