Of course Salmond Truthers and online conspiracism hurts the Yes cause. But, fundamentally, these behaviours have little to do with the merits or challenges of independence. Thread. https://twitter.com/lokiscottishrap/status/1246040947831508993
Yes, a cocktail of Trump-style anti-MSM narratives & US-style culture wars nonsense fanned by Putin disinformation & hyper partisan grifting bloggers has fried the brains of probably several thousand “cybernats”. And, yes, these pour souls are easy “marks” for conspiracists.
And, yes, the Salmond trial presents an obvious disinformation event. It would not matter what the reality of testimony was, or what the verdict was. There was always going to be internet BS designed to dupe those “marks”. And not just cos Salmond is a Kremlin broadcaster.
I’ll admit the response of some cybernats to the trial has been distressingly stupid and misogynistic. I can understand why genuine Indy supporters and the mainstream SNP would be dismayed by this primeval shriek of Trumpism. But.....
But.... just the conduct of one man does not define a movement, nor does the behaviour of some vulnerable people radicalised online.
This is also true of unionists. People who want Scotland to remain part of Britain are not defined by football fans or golf club bores with union jacks in their avatars who promote conspiracy theories about the snp having secret watchlists (the later to saw).
We need, as a society, think about what makes us vulnerable to conspiracism and what makes us resilient to it. Hyperpartisan behaviour has been an issue for the Yes side. But the No side too.
And remember the thing about hyperpartisans? Their tribalism is an act. I’ve been castigated myself by hyper partisan muppets for reporting the views of the parties they claim to support.
On the Yes side, bloggers who a few years ago were demonising opponents of the SNP - dispatching digital pitchfork mobs - are turning their bile on the party with the same conspiracist nonsense about spooks.