Member's statement: Social Media
Member's statement by Mr Keith Buchanan on .
- MLA
- Mr Keith Buchanan
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 11 November 2024
- Type
- Member's statement
- Business
- Members' Statements
- Heading
- Social Media
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 4667112
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Growing up, many of us learned that the pen is mightier than the sword. That remains true today, especially when it comes to social media. Social media can be a powerful tool that helps us all communicate useful information to our constituents and wider society. Local and national media outlets use it, as do churches, schools and community groups, and our children and young people seem to spend a lot of time on their socials. Despite the good and valuable information that can be found online, there is, however, a darker side that involves online abuse, and no one is immune to it. It can be a way for school bullies to continue their abuse outside the limits of school, and those with violent tendencies can often transfer their physical abuse to mental abuse through the use of social media. Public figures and politicians are not immune to that type of abuse, as keyboard warriors often feel that they can say what they want online without the need for accuracy of any description. There are those who believe that online abuse against politicians is inevitable and acceptable, and most public figures occasionally find themselves on the receiving end of spiteful and hurtful comments and attacks. Sometimes, a misunderstanding that could easily be resolved by a phone call or a face-to-face conversation takes on a new life when someone posts on social media. Many read comments on Facebook and other social media sites and believe the written word without doing their own research and fact-finding. One clear rule that everyone on social media should remember is to make sure that they do not say anything in a public forum that they would not say to someone's face. Remember that the person whom you are attacking has feelings and has family members who have feelings. When individuals are attacked, those in their family and in their employment are also hurt and left feeling dejected. Regardless of whether you are a politician, a celebrity or a child or young person in school, you are not fair game. It is all too easy to get carried away when there is a keyboard at your fingertips, but remember this: there may be consequences for your actions, as there is in the real world when speaking.
380 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.04 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- No identity-based framing was identified (0.93).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.03 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.05 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.15 | No |
| Overall judgement | 0.04 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 0.93 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.07 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.76 |
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.10 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.07 |
| Sectarianism, hate crime and community relations | 0.04 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.02 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 11:32 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.