How do we solve a problem like Maajid Nawaz, given what now appears to have become a journey to re-radicalisation?

Your advice please - on how some dangers may be averted.

I've been chronicling this but want to step back, by late Jan. So a few ideas on how others might help.
"Don't feed the trolls" is often good advice. There are limits to how much anyone can worry about online misinformation.

I see these 3 reasons why Mr Nawaz is a different case to AN Other tweeters

They may suggest some 'horses for courses' approaches to who could address what.
In November, I thought this was a knockabout online politics debate: was saying Trump could win the Presidency, after Nov 4th, just clutching at straws?

The content in last 3 days & since Jan 5th has been much worse. Hitting a dangerous new low today https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1349005684692701184
The core responsibility of @LBC is to keep their broadcast output within the editorial code and Ofcom regulations.

None of us like to pick public fights with colleagues. An LBC senior reporter Matthew Thompson did set out where the boundary needs to be. https://twitter.com/mattuthompson/status/1327624419905331200
If others feel the content crosses the line, its possible to complain - to LBC or Ofcom. I have done so (once) about an irresponsible and factually wrong "Lockdown Kills" monologue. I have been told I might hear something about that in another 10 days https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1346473168995713025
This was irresponsible broadcasting. Nawaz (taking calls on May's UK local elections) states his view that "responsible citizens" felt the Washington insurrection was their "only option". There had not been a free & fair election in the USA. https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1348392486759256065
People might complain about that one too. A trickier question about LBC. Do broadcasters & media experts have a view?

Should LBC stick to narrow view - all that matters is what is said in their studio (which is much calmer) so none of the online conspiracies are their business?
Clear why an org may do that: it may avoid opening a can of worms. So a Jekyll/Hyde compromise of a calmer "Regulated Maajid" and "Online Maajid" (promoting radicalisng conspiracy memes)?

Any limits to what can be ignored? Reputational? Duty of Care? Threats? Radicalisation?
Clear why an org may do that: it may avoid opening a can of worms. So a Jekyll/Hyde compromise of a calmer "Regulated Maajid" and "Online Maajid" (promoting radicalisng conspiracy memes)?Any limits to what can be ignored? Reputational? Duty of Care? Threats? Radicalisation?
Clear why an org may do that: it may avoid opening a can of worms. So a Jekyll/Hyde compromise of a calmer "Regulated Maajid" and "Online Maajid" (promoting radicalisng conspiracy memes)?Any limits to what can be ignored? Reputational? Duty of Care? Threats? Radicalisation?
Clear why an org may do that: it may avoid opening a can of worms. So a Jekyll/Hyde compromise of a calmer "Regulated Maajid" and "Online Maajid" (promoting radicalisng conspiracy memes)?Any limits to what can be ignored? Reputational? Duty of Care? Threats? Radicalisation?
Two sets of questions for LBC
(1) Is editorial oversight working? Were boundaries crossed on air - eg "lockdown kills" claims; Sidney Powell Dominion allegations were "not conspiracy theory"; US insurrectionists "responsible citizens" pursuing "only option" after stolen election?
(2) Can LBC ignore Online Maajid?

Conflict of Interest also a direct responsibility for LBC. I just do not know if reports/speculation) that MN's strong pro-Trump advocacy reflects QF donors are valid. But it would be part of LBC's job to check it is all above board.
More questions have been asked of @LBC than of @QuilliamOrg which calls itself "the world's first counter-extremism think-tank, with a full spectrum approach to promote pluralism and inspire change".
It tackles extremism of all kinds - and is localising its efforts, with a UK team, a North America team, and a global team
https://www.quilliaminternational.com/about/ 
Quilliam seem to have a different focus now to the org when it was very prominent in the UK. It had £1 million of Home Office |funding, 2008-12, in its start-up phase. As far as I know, it has not had UK govt funding in recent years
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/home-office-funding-to-the-quilliam-foundation-from-2008-to-2012/home-office-funding-to-the-quilliam-foundation-2008-to-2012
QF remained influential after that. While Nawaz was never a formal adviser to David Cameron, to my knowledge, he did tweet that he was "proud to have helped" with the then PM's 2015 speech on Islamism and counter-extremism, saying "our work is taking root"
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/02/maajid-nawaz-how-a-former-islamist-became-david-camerons-anti-extremism-adviser
QF remained influential after that. While Nawaz was never a formal adviser to David Cameron, to my knowledge, he did tweet that he was "proud to have helped" with the then PM's 2015 speech on Islamism and counter-extremism, saying "our work is taking root" https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/02/maajid-nawaz-how-a-former-islamist-became-david-camerons-anti-extremism-adviser
QF remained influential after that. While Nawaz was never a formal adviser to David Cameron, to my knowledge, he did tweet that he was "proud to have helped" with the then PM's 2015 speech on Islamism and counter-extremism, saying "our work is taking root" https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/02/maajid-nawaz-how-a-former-islamist-became-david-camerons-anti-extremism-adviser
Its tricky to find much up-to-date info on the main QF website. The @QuilliamOrg Twitter feed suggests a mainly international focus over the last year. This challenge to Labour engagement with the SWP on 15/10/2020 is the last UK-focused post
Its tricky to find much up-to-date info on the main QF website. The @QuilliamOrg Twitter feed suggests a mainly international focus over the last year. This challenge to Labour engagement with the SWP on 15/10/2020 is the last UK-focused post
Its tricky to find much up-to-date info on the main QF website. The @QuilliamOrg Twitter feed suggests a mainly international focus over the last year. This challenge to Labour engagement with the SWP on 15/10/2020 is the last UK-focused post
This section of the website captures the range of international activities that QF has been involved in recently http://journal.quilliaminternational.com/ 
Perspectives

The Journal of Quilliam International

http://journal.quilliaminternational.com/
QF do say that QAnon may seem like an elaborate joke, but that the "crazy cult" is dangerous and worth taking seriously. They ran a webinar on this with credible experts in October
QF do say that QAnon may seem like an elaborate joke, but that the "crazy cult" is dangerous and worth taking seriously. They ran a webinar on this with credible experts in October
QF do say that QAnon may seem like an elaborate joke, but that the "crazy cult" is dangerous and worth taking seriously. They ran a webinar on this with credible experts in October
You can watch the QF seminar on QAnon here. https://twitter.com/QuilliamOrg/status/1315589149316067330
On Quilliam: the organisation considers the QAnon theory a dangerous form of extremism. Do they need to engage privately and/or publicly with their founder becoming rather adjacent to it, and to related forms of unsubstantiated pro-Trump conspiracies since the election?
One suggestion on Quilliam. I feel it is for those who have been supportive and constructively engaged with the work of QF to make this point to QF. (Those who have always been critical of Nawaz/QF can't add much directly there). It is also a legitimate question from the media.
Question: is there anything the counter-extremism policy community could or should be doing about - either to intervene directly; and/or to learn from this episode?

Akeela Ahmed MBE, chair of the anti-Muslim hate working group, has said this https://twitter.com/AkeelaAhmed/status/1349063012167151617
Finally, no mainstream/national media coverage of this (though Washington Post featured Mr Nawaz in a piece on international). He had a high profile as a deradicalised extremist turned inside influencer with New Labour, Cameron and Clegg (for whom he stood in 2015 GE)
Finally, no mainstream/national media coverage of this (though Washington Post featured Mr Nawaz in a piece on international). He had a high profile as a deradicalised extremist turned inside influencer with New Labour, Cameron and Clegg (for whom he stood in 2015 GE)
Finally, no mainstream/national media coverage of this (though Washington Post featured Mr Nawaz in a piece on international). He had a high profile as a deradicalised extremist turned inside influencer with New Labour, Cameron and Clegg (for whom he stood in 2015 GE)
I think serious broadsheet, broadcast media could make a useful contribution.
- It would be a way to ask questions (and potentially get some answers).
- Done seriously, this could illuminate several key themes in again topical issues of radicalisation & deradicalisation
This thread suggested by @Sime0nStylites Thanks for your contributions and feedback so far
https://twitter.com/Sime0nStylites/status/1349054275146690561
Background: this openness to and promotion of conspiracy and misinformation is documented here. https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1346997950845755394
Developments: Post-election thread tracking whether or when Mr Nawaz may acknowledge that the certification of President-elect Biden took place (not yet); and/or accept the final outcome of the election process as legitimate (as he said he would) https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1347719131836133377
Private Eye have published a straightforward descriptive account of the Nawaz episode. While Quilliam have not publicly acknowledged any of the conspiracy issues or radicalisation risks, the magazine does report there have been recent staff departures. https://twitter.com/GerryHassan/status/1351969619687444481?s=19
The Observer: "LBC's Maajid Nawaz's fascination with conspiracies raises alarm" https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2021/jan/31/lbcs-maajid-nawazs-fascination-with-conspiracies-raises-alarm
LBC’s Maajid Nawaz’s fascination with conspiracies raises alarm

The radio host has been criticised for his tweets on the coronavirus and US elections

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2021/jan/31/lbcs-maajid-nawazs-fascination-with-conspiracies-raises-alarm
Former @QuilliamOrg Director of Policy @ToubeDavid has also now confirmed publicly that he has left the counter-extremism think-tank for "this very reason" - the spreading of conspiracy theories, inc from extreme sources. But i do not think the org has made any public comment yet
Former @QuilliamOrg Director of Policy @ToubeDavid has also now confirmed publicly that he has left the counter-extremism think-tank for "this very reason" - the spreading of conspiracy theories, inc from extreme sources. But i do not think the org has made any public comment yet
Former @QuilliamOrg Director of Policy @ToubeDavid has also now confirmed publicly that he has left the counter-extremism think-tank for "this very reason" - the spreading of conspiracy theories, inc from extreme sources. But i do not think the org has made any public comment yet
"Mr Nawaz denies that he has been drawn into conspiracy theory rhetoric & has threatened The Observer with legal action".I gave the newspaper my honest opinion of seeing this evolve from unusual misreadings of US politics to engaging in wild election & QAnon-inspired conspiracies
My comment that I could not see a benign interpretation of spreading Q-Anon inspired conspiracies refers to Mr Nawaz actively participating in this "Pompeo countdown". This wild theory was a major focus for heightening radicalised excitement online among QAnon supporters.
My comment that I could not see a benign interpretation of spreading Q-Anon inspired conspiracies refers to Mr Nawaz actively participating in this "Pompeo countdown". This wild theory was a major focus for heightening radicalised excitement online among QAnon supporters.
My comment that I could not see a benign interpretation of spreading Q-Anon inspired conspiracies refers to Mr Nawaz actively participating in this "Pompeo countdown". This wild theory was a major focus for heightening radicalised excitement online among QAnon supporters.
My comment that I could not see a benign interpretation of spreading Q-Anon inspired conspiracies refers to Mr Nawaz actively participating in this "Pompeo countdown". This wild theory was a major focus for heightening radicalised excitement online among QAnon supporters.
My comment that I could not see a benign interpretation of spreading Q-Anon inspired conspiracies refers to Mr Nawaz actively participating in this "Pompeo countdown". This wild theory was a major focus for heightening radicalised excitement online among QAnon supporters.
There was intense speculation over how to interpret the (scheduled) tweets, combined with QAnon imagery like the Punisher skull. MN also put the Punisher skull up on Facebook, before warning people not to try to cancel his childhood iconography. With a wink.
There was intense speculation over how to interpret the (scheduled) tweets, combined with QAnon imagery like the Punisher skull. MN also put the Punisher skull up on Facebook, before warning people not to try to cancel his childhood iconography. With a wink.
There was intense speculation over how to interpret the (scheduled) tweets, combined with QAnon imagery like the Punisher skull. MN also put the Punisher skull up on Facebook, before warning people not to try to cancel his childhood iconography. With a wink.
There was intense speculation over how to interpret the (scheduled) tweets, combined with QAnon imagery like the Punisher skull. MN also put the Punisher skull up on Facebook, before warning people not to try to cancel his childhood iconography. With a wink.
There was intense speculation over how to interpret the (scheduled) tweets, combined with QAnon imagery like the Punisher skull. MN also put the Punisher skull up on Facebook, before warning people not to try to cancel his childhood iconography. With a wink.
Observer mentions that Nawaz shared a "fascinating" thread by Dr Thomas Binder, the ultra-conspiracist on every front imaginable, about how "almost everybody fell for the myth of a pandemic of a new corona killer virus"
Nawaz said it wasn't his field to give an opinion on the fascinating article that Covid was a hoax. But he shared it anyway. As a founder of a *counter*-extremist think-tank, being able to spot an anti-semitic 9/11, Pearl harbour, Bill Gates, Assad Truther ought to be his field.
Nawaz said it wasn't his field to give an opinion on the fascinating article that Covid was a hoax. But he shared it anyway. As a founder of a *counter*-extremist think-tank, being able to spot an anti-semitic 9/11, Pearl harbour, Bill Gates, Assad Truther ought to be his field.
Nawaz said it wasn't his field to give an opinion on the fascinating article that Covid was a hoax. But he shared it anyway. As a founder of a *counter*-extremist think-tank, being able to spot an anti-semitic 9/11, Pearl harbour, Bill Gates, Assad Truther ought to be his field.
Nawaz said it wasn't his field to give an opinion on the fascinating article that Covid was a hoax. But he shared it anyway. As a founder of a *counter*-extremist think-tank, being able to spot an anti-semitic 9/11, Pearl harbour, Bill Gates, Assad Truther ought to be his field.
Nawaz said it wasn't his field to give an opinion on the fascinating article that Covid was a hoax. But he shared it anyway. As a founder of a *counter*-extremist think-tank, being able to spot an anti-semitic 9/11, Pearl harbour, Bill Gates, Assad Truther ought to be his field.
Mr Nawaz is attacking the Guardian for a (fact-check) article in The Observer. I do not think this concern about conspiracies is in any way confined to "the left" or critics of Quilliam, given that his own Policy Director has left the org over his descent into conspiracies.
Mr Nawaz is attacking the Guardian for a (fact-check) article in The Observer. I do not think this concern about conspiracies is in any way confined to "the left" or critics of Quilliam, given that his own Policy Director has left the org over his descent into conspiracies.
Mr Nawaz is attacking the Guardian for a (fact-check) article in The Observer. I do not think this concern about conspiracies is in any way confined to "the left" or critics of Quilliam, given that his own Policy Director has left the org over his descent into conspiracies.
Some of the critics are usual suspects: this is a 'regressive left' plot. Other experts, engaged with QF (eg, over challenging QAnon) do not fit that: but that is a 'stab in the back'
Some of the critics are usual suspects: this is a 'regressive left' plot. Other experts, engaged with QF (eg, over challenging QAnon) do not fit that: but that is a 'stab in the back'
Some of the critics are usual suspects: this is a 'regressive left' plot. Other experts, engaged with QF (eg, over challenging QAnon) do not fit that: but that is a 'stab in the back'
Some of the critics are usual suspects: this is a 'regressive left' plot. Other experts, engaged with QF (eg, over challenging QAnon) do not fit that: but that is a 'stab in the back'
Some of the critics are usual suspects: this is a 'regressive left' plot. Other experts, engaged with QF (eg, over challenging QAnon) do not fit that: but that is a 'stab in the back'
Here is Mr Nawaz attack on the Guardian over the Observer story.
You can read it here
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=3754208764646361&id=135775283156412
I have left a reply to the Facebook thread.
If this is the competition, the opening tweet of my original November tweet about Mr Nawaz going down the rabbit hole has had over 1 million page impressions.
Nawaz challenges The Observer article (ignoring the content) by saying its sister paper The Guardian "continues its obsession" with him, as it "regularly" attacks him for refusing to provide a "minstrel show". As a matter of fact, how often does the Guardian challenge Nawaz?
Searching his name on the Guardian website suggests there have been very few references in the last 3 years & many fewer since 2015.

The last substantive Guardian piece about him appears to be this positively framed report in Feb 2019.
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Maajid+nawaz&as_sitesearch=www.theguardian.com#ip=1
There was pretty neutral/partly positive reference to Nawaz as a rare minority voice on the station in a highly critical piece about LBC since then
Nawaz wrote a dozen pieces for the Guardian in Comment is Free era, up to 2015. Factually: they published him as a critical ex-Islamist. His claim they preferred him as an Islamist seems to be made-up/imaginary. He wrote for them only once Quilliam founded https://www.theguardian.com/profile/maajid-nawaz
Maajid Nawaz | The Guardian

Maajid Nawaz is co-founder and chairman of Quilliam. He is on Twitter as MaajidNawaz

https://www.theguardian.com/profile/maajid-nawaz
If there is an obsession, they seem to have forgotten to pursue it for several years. The G2 cover story in 2015 was the main piece about him. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/02/maajid-nawaz-how-a-former-islamist-became-david-camerons-anti-extremism-adviser
Maajid Nawaz: how a former Islamist became David Cameron’s anti-extremism adviser

An Essex boy who clashed with skinheads, joined an Islamist group and spent four years in jail seems an unlikely government ally – and he’s not short of critics

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/02/maajid-nawaz-how-a-former-islamist-became-david-camerons-anti-extremism-adviser
The readers editor wrote that he agrees there were too many (3) anonymous quotes. The column also reported that Nawaz said he was uninvolved & unaware of the Quilliam MD sharing the phone number of the commissioning editor online (before deleting that) https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/09/anonymous-pejorative-quotes-should-be-used-only-in-exceptional-cases
Anonymous pejorative quotes should be used only in exceptional cases | Chris Elliott

Open door: The substance of the criticisms of former Islamist Maajid Nawaz contained within the anonymous quotes should have been put to him but they were not

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/09/anonymous-pejorative-quotes-should-be-used-only-in-exceptional-cases
Rakib Ehsan of HJS comments critically on this rather serious unsubstantiated allegation from Mr Nawaz that the criticisms of his descent into spreading conspiracies over the last 3 months are somehow racially motivated. https://twitter.com/rakibehsan/status/1356175233649168384?s=19
Hard to fit this "narrative" of a left-wing attack motivated by ethnicity with, for example, the departure of senior colleagues over the conspiracy-spreading. (Hence the misdirection? All too reminiscent of the old Hizb method, making everything binary) https://twitter.com/sundersays/status/1355819667181473793?s=19
You can follow @sundersays.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:
Those who think consciousness raising & movement building are disconnected, or even a distraction from electoral politics have not paid attention to the history of social change.In this thread, we
Read more
The 2020s will be known as the Remote Work decadeA few predictions of what is likely to emerge[ a thread ] Third Space: Office and Working from Home will
Read more
1/29: Have you ever had a concept explained to you that helps frame complex issues you’ve been wrestling with and opens your eyes to new possibilities? A concept that I
Read more
By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.