Tuesday 22 February 2011

Milo Yiannopoulos: LLFF responds

As every child who's ever been bullied will know, the most effective way to deal with the perpetrators is to ignore them. Don't give them any more airtime than they've already got; they'll soon get bored and go away.

This morning I read an article that made me huff, roll my eyes, toss my head and go, 'Oh for fuck's sake' about six time while I was sitting at my desk. And normally I'd ignore it. Normally I'd think such rubbish is not worth my time. But this article was written by a young man in The Daily Telegraph, the (sole) paper my parents read, and it is so blasély one-sided, so irritatingly and confidently partisan, that if it were your only source of opinion, it would be almost impossible to see the other side. As my parents' only child, I feel it is my duty and my right to stick up for my side of things. Unfortunately, this means engaging with Milo Yiannopoulos, the man described by Nationaltreasurestephenfry as a "cynical, ignorant fucker."

The background: Milo was on last Thursday's Ten O'Clock Live, an unapologetically left-leaning current affairs show that goes out once a week on Channel 4. As a writer for the Telegraph, and one who's no stranger to controversy, he was clearly drafted in to represent the right on a panel that was to discuss the recent spate of public protests in Britain. Following Milo's short appearance on the show, he was subjected to a barrage of angry messages on Twitter and Facebook, and this morning the Telegraph published an article he'd written about this incident.

The piece starts with Milo claiming that people had decided to hate him because he had said that protesting "has been historically ineffective" in Britain. First mistake. People weren't angry because he said that polling isn't a big deal. People were angry because he was utterly dismissive and patronising to Tamsin Ormond, and because in the few seconds he was on air, he managed to come across like the worst type of privileged know-it-all, utterly unable to engage with the average Joe. His presence on the panel did nothing to change the view that the right in this country is a collection of grandiose bigots who are convinced that They Know Best. The opinion that protesting may be ineffective is a fine and valid one to hold. But if you speak like Hugh Grant, you should know if you decide to go on live TV and laughingly scoff at your opponents as if they're flies on your caviar, you're going to ruffle a lot of viewers' feathers.

My parents won't ever see Milo's performance on Ten O'Clock Live. They'll read his article and think he's right, that he's being unfairly vilified by the naughty Left for holding utterly normal views.

My parents won't know the original context of the Jan Moir incident - Milo empathises with her as she was similarly victimised on Twitter. Poor old Jan, whose article suggested that there was something inherently "sleazy" and unnatural about the death of Stephen Gately, the gay member of Boyzone who died in 2009, and then managed to connect the incident to a paragraph questioning the validity of civil partnerships for gay couples. Yes, poor Jan, victimised so unfairly for such unprejudiced open-mindedness that she eventually won Stonewall's Bigot of the Year award. Now I'm not the brightest bulb on Harrod's, but if you're ever reduced to thinking, "Now I know how Jan Moir must have felt," it might be time to question the validity of your original quest.

Having explained what happened to him, Milo then warms to his theme. How, he asks, can the Left think it is acceptable to publically bully those with whose views they disagree? "How come it always seems to be the Left doing the shouting?" he asks, with staggering blindness. So there are no right wing bigots stirring up hatred online? He's clearly never come across Guido Fawkes or Sarah Palin. And I'm not actually sure that calling users of social media "this congealed clump of morons", as Milo does in his conclusion, shows much generosity of spirit.

Yes, Milo, the left are shouting online. Why? Because the Right are in control. The people who lead our country are rippling with privilege, the people who run our economy are wealthy to the point of immunity, and our current electoral system is fundamentally unfair. The Left is shouting because they're unhappy, and they use social media because, for many, it feels like the first time they've been heard. Like it or not, their voice is valid - but to say that social media is dominated by the Left is a little silly. There are over half a billion people on Facebook: approximately one twelfth of the world's population. Do you think they're all Marx-reading commies? Because they really, really aren't. You can slag them all off as a congealed clump of morons, Milo - or you can try to find the huge and wonderful variety within. But then, I guess that an appreciation of difference isn't one of the Right's special skills.

Milo won't read this blog, but my parents will. Every time I wince at their Telegraph-reading habits, I know they're mentally doing the same, thinking that my Guardian experience is just as biased. They're right - the views I share with my friends, and the newspapers I read, lean further to the left than the tower of Pisa. I'm not trying to persuade my parents to abandon Cameron - I'm afraid I've given up wasting my breath. But I hope they can be aware that there are two sides to every story - and, on this occasion, Milo's version was as wilfully blind as a bat in a backwards balaclava. We didn't scoff at him after Ten O'Clock Live because we disagreed with his opinion. We scoffed because of the patronising way he expressed it, and then we scoffed again about his article this morning because he missed the point so spectacularly. Social media is modernity, and slagging it off is to whine "I do not like reality": unconstructive, anachronistic and guaranteed to make enemies. Which, the cynic within points out, is exactly what sells papers.

I don't think Milo should have a bath with a toaster. I don't wish he were dead and I don't want to cause him physical pain. I don't really even care what he thinks. I just want my parents to know that, on this topic, The Torygraph got it wrong. I'm politically left, and I love social media, but I'm not a moron, mummy, I promise. Please still love me.

4 comments:

  1. Anonymous 400:00

    I read his article and wondered if he was related to Greek singing legend Yani? If so, that would clearly be an excellent reason for him to bathe with a toaster.

    As it is, you're both wrong. As only two people whose views come from the Guardian and Telegraph could be. There is a MIDDLE WAY here and neither of you are taking it.

    But, Jane, come off it - you are an intelligent, witty and self-aware (maybe too much? But what do I know, eh?) woman. Therefore, I am 100% certain that if you were confronted by Tamsin Ormond you would, in under 12 seconds, say something dimissive, patronising etc to her. You would not be able to help yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  2. What's the middle way in this case, then, Anon 4? Enlighten me...

    ReplyDelete
  3. "As willfully blind as a bat in a backwards balaclava"

    Absolute genius. I'm glad I stumbled across this rare gem of a blog, it definitely made googling Milo worthwhile :P

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hello Aman! And a belated Welcome. I thank you wholeheartedly for your praise and sincerely hope that I can continue to entertain you in future.

    ReplyDelete