The day started like a nightmare for parents across Merseyside. Chilling reports of bomb threats targeting schools spread like wildfire, sending waves of panic through communities. Schools, in a desperate bid to protect their students, reacted swiftly: some locked down, others sent children home. In the midst of this terrifying uncertainty, while official channels—schools, emergency services, and mainstream media—worked tirelessly to provide factual, measured updates, a different kind of information storm was brewing. The “Around Liverpool” social media pages, self-described as a “weird news page” that publishes “news on this page is written by the followers,” became a major disseminator of unchecked, often wildly inaccurate, information, adding fuel to an already volatile situation. With nearly 200,000 followers across Facebook, Instagram, and X (formerly Twitter), their posts reached a massive audience, amplifying fear and confusion when clarity was most needed.
The problem wasn’t just that Around Liverpool was sharing unverified information; it was the nature of that information. On the day of the hoax threats, the account posted a video of a supposed “bomb hoax person being arrested,” a dramatic voice note proclaiming “this is not a drill,” and even a video of a car on fire – all completely unrelated or false. In another instance, they peddled a baseless rumor about students planning stabbings between schools, though with a half-hearted disclaimer that “This could just be internet rumours.” When confronted by worried followers about the danger of spreading such falsehoods, the individual behind the account, rather than acknowledging the gravity of the situation, responded with remarkable dismissiveness. His unapologetic declaration, “Even though [I am] not perfect, I still trust the word on the street. If u (sic) don’t like it, f*** off,” perfectly encapsulated the cavalier attitude towards journalistic integrity and public safety. He even openly admitted, “I let the followers write the news on this page and as you can see, it’s never 100% accurate,” seemingly unconcerned with the real-world consequences of such inaccuracy during a crisis.
This pattern of irresponsible dissemination is not an isolated incident. Liverpool City Council’s mayor, Liam Robinson, rightfully condemned Around Liverpool’s actions as “immoral and irresponsible,” highlighting how such content undermines trust in official institutions and can hamper emergency responses. Detective Inspector John Black of Merseyside Police echoed these concerns, emphasizing that whether intentional or not, sharing misinformation has tangible, negative consequences, particularly by escalating fear and jeopardizing sensitive investigations. He cited a previous instance where Around Liverpool incorrectly claimed that new cameras near St John’s Gardens were for “recording and listening to people’s conversations,” suggesting they were “the first live audio, AI CCTV cameras in a public park.” Merseyside Police had to step in to clarify that these devices were, in fact, part of a speaker system used to deter offenders and provide crime prevention advice after a series of sex attacks, not for eavesdropping. This recurring theme of sensationalized, baseless claims consistently puts the public at risk and diverts valuable resources from genuine policing efforts.
The individual behind Around Liverpool described his venture as starting as a “daft meme page sharing funny videos,” but it has undeniably evolved into something far more contentious. His political leanings, which he openly admits have “switched from left to right,” are increasingly reflected in the content he shares. He has reposted content from controversial figures like Tommy Robinson and Elon Musk, and even a comment from right-wing pundit Jess Gill disputing the welcoming of the Windrush generation to the UK. His support for figures like Rupert Lowe and the far-right Restore Britain party further illustrates this ideological shift. When criticized by the Liverpool Against Hate X account for his posts during the school hoaxes, his response was a tirade of aggressive and divisive language, calling his critic a “typical left wing s*** bag” and accusing them of being “woke and weak beta males.” This aggressive and partisan tone reveals a platform that has strayed far from its initial “meme page” origins, becoming a potent outlet for politically charged and often inflammatory content, further complicating the public information landscape.
The most concerning aspect, as authorities rightly point out, is the persistent spread of misinformation, especially during critical events. Councillor Liam Robinson articulated the immense distress such posts cause, particularly for parents already grappling with unimaginable fears. He underscored how this “schoolyard gossip” on an amplified scale undermines the credibility of trusted information sources like the police, schools, and established media outlets. Detective Inspector Black reiterated that social media accounts, even those with blue ticks, are not inherently reliable, urging the public to critically evaluate the source of information before sharing. He highlighted that while Merseyside Police strives for timely and accurate communication during threats, misinformation actively hinders their efforts, giving “momentum to far-fetched claims, and creating additional fear for those who were already understandably concerned.” The cumulative effect is a society less equipped to distinguish fact from fiction, especially when emotions are high, making communities more vulnerable to panic and distrust.
Despite these serious criticisms from police and local authorities, the individual behind Around Liverpool maintained a complex, and at times contradictory, defense. He claimed his aim was to “provide candid news with live updates sent in by the followers,” stating, “For me truth is always what is most important, so I allow both sides to share their side of the story.” He asserted that his “intelligent adults” followers could “make their own mind up on truth when they see both sides so they aren’t swayed by a one sided agenda.” He even claimed to only share “already viral posts that were being shared on similar pages” and to include disclaimers about unconfirmed information, along with warnings against panic. He portrayed himself as “honest and transparent,” willing to remove and correct posts if proven unfair or untrue. However, at the time of reporting, all the demonstrably false posts about the school hoaxes remained on his pages, contradicting his claims of diligent oversight and ethical conduct. Following intensified scrutiny, he announced plans to sell his powerful social media empire, citing “hassle” and valuing his combined 200,000 followers and 30-50 million monthly views at £8,000, a move that subtly underlines the commercial value he places on these platforms, even amidst the serious ethical questions they raise.