We've seen time and again how quickly controversies can spread online. We've also come to appreciate the permanence of online content; an off-hand comment can be immortalised in a second by a screenshot.
This time it's nutritionist Gillian McKeith who is in the eye of the Twitterstorm. The background is here, but in summary: a Twitter user with a very minor following alluded to allegations surrounding the validity of McKeith's PhD:
"So excited about the next chapter of Bad Science - It's the one on Gillian McKeith. (not Phd)".
The comment refers to the book Bad Science by Dr Ben Goldacre, in which the qualified doctor and Guardian columnist took issue with, among other things, some of McKeith's claims and qualification.
McKeith responded to the above Tweet with a series of @ messages to the user, accusing her of anti-American (because McKeith's qualification was awarded in the US) bigotry (and Goldacre of lying and being an "ass", highlighted).
The offending tweets have now disappeared from McKeith's Twitter stream, along with a later one calling attacks on her "chav-like". But it scarcely matters anyway, because by the time anything gets important enough to delete, its original provenance is fairly irrelevant.
A screenshot here and a retweet there, and these comments could last forever - or at least as long as people care.
I don't think anybody has ever criticised McKeith because she got her PhD in the US, isn't the allegation that she got it from some unaccredited establishment?
Posted by: Anon | Jul 13, 2010 at 17:56