The State must tackle anonymous trolls so we can all drink our tea in peace

IF ever there was even a sliver of doubt that Twitter is infested by irrational morons, then the fallout of new Chancellor Rishi Sunak posing with his favourite brew must surely dispel it once and for all.

Yorkshire Tea got trolled.

Yep, that’s right. An inanimate object consisting of mesh and leaves bore the full, bilious brunt of virtue-signalling nastiness from those who have probably also been hash-tagging the crap out of #bekind for the past week.

“If I was Yorkshire Tea I’d be very worried about my supporters all being racist Brexiteers — perhaps their super-Brit TV ad is responsible?” said one of the politer posts. Others advocated that the brand should be boycotted.

A spokesman for Yorkshire Tea responded: “On Friday, the Chancellor shared a photo of our tea.

Politicians do that sometimes (Jeremy Corbyn did it in 2017). We weren’t asked or involved — and we said so the same day. Lots of people got angry with us all the same.”

That’s because trolls aren’t interested in the whys, wherefores or, quite frankly, any context at all.

They’re simply virtue-signalling from a position of self-bestowed righteousness to try to give meaning — via their target’s legion of followers — to their own sad existence.

Yorkshire Tea’s response was impressively measured, but the last line has all of us thinking: “Who are these worrying idiots?”

Last week it was reported that actor Freddie Fox was spat at in the street because of something his cousin Laurence said on the BBC’s Question Time.

ECHO CHAMBER

His cousin. Not even Laurence himself, who, by the way, should also be able to walk the streets without fearing physical or even aggressively verbal repercussions from someone who simply disagrees with his opinion.

When moronic irrationality is restricted to the echo chamber of Twitter, it can be switched off and ignored.

But when it spills out of the Twittersphere and impacts on a victim’s family or livelihood, then surely society as a whole must unite to stop it?

Because, one day, it could be you. Or, worse, your children.

Former Met detective Philip Grindell was called in to help politicians deal with online abuse, which rose by 150 per cent last year.

After retiring he helped a “global icon” who was scared for their life.

“It was a famous person who was getting death threats,” says Philip, 53, who has now started a company called Defuse Global to anticipate and assess the risk of online abuse.

PROVIDE FULL ID

He discovered the death threats were coming from someone in the UK who had mental health issues and weren’t considered a risk to the personal safety of his client.

Several years ago, Sky News confronted a woman who had repeatedly trolled the McCanns after the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine in 2007.

The woman, in her 60s, who had, “previously grappled with mental illness”, killed herself just days after being confronted.

So tackling online trolling is clearly a minefield to navigate, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try.

Just because much of it comes from a place of deep sadness or instability in the troll’s life, why should that allow them to inflict damage on other people with impunity?

This isn’t about disagreeing with someone’s views in a rational, well-argued way.

It’s about downright nastiness and threats to someone’s mental or physical well-being. And it needs to be tackled by the State, not just private companies.

We have to provide full ID before we board a plane, so why not insist on it when setting up an online account which must include our real name followed by a unique number?

Then, currently anonymous trolls might think twice before whipping up hate about someone they don’t even know and we can all drink our tea (whatever the brand) in peace.

Make-up show-offs

OH gawd, here it comes again – the tyranny of a “no make-up” photo posted by Hollywood glitterati.

Stop. It. Now.

The latest salvo was fired by Gwyneth Paltrow, who hosted a “natural” dinner party to promote her well-being website Goop and invited, among others, Demi Moore and Kate Hudson.

Demi, who has spent £48squillion on cosmetic surgery, looked great. As well she might.

Equally, I once got in a lift with Kate Hudson, who is quite simply one of the most stunning women I have ever seen.

And then we have Gwynnie herself, who has the radiant glow of a woman who spends the national debt of a small country on skin treatments and products.

The reality, of course, is that there’s little meaning to this “no make-up” dinner party other than for the attendees to show how great they look.

Meanwhile, those dealing only with what God gave them remain judged by the sentiment once expressed by beauty guru Helena Rubinstein.

“There are no ugly women, only lazy ones.”

Prince pal vid mystery

A FORMER friend of paedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s right-hand woman Ghislaine Maxwell has told the FBI of a potentially relevant conversation they once had.

“She said many things . . . ” reveals Christina Oxenburg.

“Stuff like: ‘Jeffrey and I have everyone on videotape!’”

Interesting.

Could this perhaps explain Prince Andrew’s haste to cross the Atlantic and share a walk in the park simply to, he claims, break off the friendship with a man he also claims he didn’t know that well?

Or was it to find out if there were videos that he should be worried about from his time enjoying Epstein’s hospitality?

Al's ex honest on age

AL PACINO, 79, has been dumped by his 40-year-old girlfriend Meital Dohan.

“I tried to deny it, but he is already an elderly man,” she says with refreshing candour.

“So even with all my love, it didn’t last.”

In other words, he’s very set in his ways, probably a little curmudgeonly at times and “the nursing years” are looming.

Inspirational toys

THE maker of Barbie is bringing out three “inspirational women dolls” in the shape of ex-tennis champ Billie Jean King, hero nurse Florence Nightingale and singer Ella Fitzgerald, complete with “authentic clothing”.

Nice idea, but let’s see how it pans out.

Chances are they’ll end up in the “Barbie box” with all the others – dressed in a boob tube, sequined leggings and their hair in wonky plaits.

Harry's talking rubbish

THE W&M Bar-B-Q Burger bar in Honolulu, Hawaii, has been serving its client favourite, the Royal Burger, since 1940.

Last time I looked they weren’t locked in litigation with The Queen.

That’s because no one in their right mind would ever associate a burger restaurant with the British monarchy.

The same, however, cannot be said of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

One of them was born royal, they both enjoyed a breathtakingly expensive royal wedding, undertook royal duties (in Meghan’s case, just a few) and received money from the Duchy of Cornwall, which the reigning son of the current British monarch (as royal as royal gets) inherits.

So while Harry and Meghan’s little barb that The Queen doesn’t have legal jurisdiction in the US over the word royal is correct, the notion that their use of the word isn’t inextricably linked to the British crown is patent nonsense and Her Majesty is right to insist they drop it.

• GOT a story? RING The Sun on 0207 782 4104 or WHATSAPP on 07423720250 or EMAIL exclusive@the-sun.co.uk