The Guardian offers counselling to staff after ‘upsetting’ Trump election result!

If ever proof were needed of how problematic the re-election of DT would be, just look at Gransnet threads on the topic over the past couple of days - snarky, sneering comments from Trump supporters who cannot stay quiet and allow people to just express their dismay and fears. None of us know how things will turn out once he's installed in power but enough warnings have been generated from a wide variety of sources during the election campaign to make even the most neutral observer wonder about the outcome, and many people are quaking in their boots about what he might or might not do. His views about climate change are terrifying for billions of people for a start.

I'm with the posters who've said "I'm done with Gransnet" and it's a shame because there's a lot of helpful advice and problem-sharing on here, but there are too many people whose opinions I really don't want to see. I have lots of family in the USA so concerns about their future as well as the planet's are close to home. Yes, I know I have a choice not to open those threads but I'm human and it sickens me to see how some people express their views.

What nonsense!!!

So, by not giving us the full story, that other papers also give counselling, this was what you might term a 'goady' post. To be fair, perhaps the Poster is new to Gransnet, and doesn't realise that we appreciate a balanced view of things.

The Grauniad printed 25 pages about Trump and his win yesterday and another batch today. I'm not surprised the staff need counselling.

The counselling was offered. As it is other organisations. We don't know if individuals have taken up the offer and maybe they have people working for The Guardian based in States.

We've debunked that myth already as soon as we found out that the Telegraph, who mocked the Guardian, and many large organisations, offer similar facilities.

We may both be right Casdon, but what makes people so invested in an election on the other side of the world, whilst seeming to be not very invested in other elections the world over. Some absolutely vile people retain or gain power, think of places all over the world, and it’s reported on the BBC and in the press and that’s it. Do people just accept it because there’s nothing they can do? But there’s nothing we can do here in the UK about the election of Trump either, so why the need (if there really is a need) for anyone to require councelling? I could understand it if Guardian journalists were being sent out to cover the Ukrainian war, or the situation in Gaza, or Lebanon. War correspondents have my greatest respect for what they do. I recently saw the film Lee, very much recommended if you haven’t seen it. She was the journalist who fought to be allowed to follow the front line in WW2. The first female journalist ever to do that. Amazing woman. But journalists needing councelling because a country the other side of the world has elected a premier who most of us don’t like (for very good reasons) doesn’t make sense to me.

Incidentally, I don’t believe for one second that anyone, let alone any British journalist operating here in the UK, needed councelling because Putin was re elected. If the journalist was living or operating in Ukraine, that’s a different matter.

This article and all the others like it don't mention that most organisations offer counselling including newspaper organisations so it's not balanced reporting. It's just trying to get people riled up and it's worked judging by this thread.

Sigh - to repeat - people aren't being offered support just because he won, its if they were involved in some relevant way . This meme has plagued this thread.

Plenty of evidence above of threats made, including violence.

madalene

It wasn’t reported!

So things can only happen if they're reported?

You’ve put your finger on it there madelene. Selective reporting is the cause of much discontent, because people don’t know what happens in organisations they have no connection with.

It wasn’t reported!

How do you know people didn't need counselling when Putin got in?

I don’t like Trump. I’m not pleased he won. However I don’t expect anyone this side of the Atlantic to need councelling because he won.

No one batted an eyelid when Putin ‘won’ the last ‘election’ in Russia. Why do some regimes drive some people (who aren’t even affected by the result) to require councelling, whilst other, far worse regimes, all over the world, don’t?

I’m puzzled.

I don't think for a minute that emotional health support is being offered just because an election was lost, btw, although somehow its become the reason its flagged up as such on this thread in order to denigrate it.
If anyone does take up what amounts to the Guardian reminding its employees a service is available I certainly don't feel capable of judging anyone who does.

Wyllow3

If the new USA administration does go after the people it has threatened, then yes, it is the abuse of power on a wider scale.

Changes to the USA judicial system so it's totally under political appointments, one of the changes that have been flagged up, is also imo an abuse of power. (as one example).

I think that's what's scary, it sounds more like Russia than the USa.

If the new USA administration does go after the people it has threatened, then yes, it is the abuse of power on a wider scale.

Changes to the USA judicial system so it's totally under political appointments, one of the changes that have been flagged up, is also imo an abuse of power. (as one example).

But the Telegraph offers counselling to it's employees. Just because the pressure haven't picked up on it (it is so trivial) doesn't mean that some of their employees didn't need it after Labour won.

That was to Casdon;s last quote.

Gosh, sorry.
I am going to a funeral this morning. Seems to be affecting me more than I realised.

Will come off GN for a while.

If President Trumpmusk does what he says he will we will all need counselling!

Or that particular words in the US dont have quite the same meaning in the Uk.

But I take your point.

Purely for an outcome of an Election,that is. your preferred Political Party lost[and you are a journalist], then no.

I have put commas and full stops in wrong places, so I will rewrite.

Purely for an outcome of an Election, that is that your preferred Political Party lost[and you are a journalist], then no.

GrannyGravy13

Casdon

petra

Galaxy

I think trump is an abusive man, however I am afraid I think Clinton's behaviour was also abusive. Nobody is happy about these things.

Let’s not forget the sainted John F Kennedy.

Are we talking about the sexual abuse of women here, which it seems they were all guilty of, or are we talking about the abuse of power on a much wider scale too? There are varying shades of corruption, and different impacts on the population due to policies which are fed by corruption.

Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely

Never has this been more apt…

Any President, PM with an overall majority can led on a power trip by big money.

It’s the absolute power element that people find the most disturbing about Trump’s presidency I think. He has publicly indicated on a number of occasions that he will ‘eliminate’ those who oppose him, which has caused a new level of fear. It remains to be seen if those threats are empty.

WellsRose

I don't have a problem with anyone being offered counselling. It's a talking service and it's not affecting me in anyway.

If you work for NHS or Police etc and things are triggering or traumatic, yes of course.

Purely for an outcome of an Election,that is. your preferred Political Party lost[and you are a journalist], then no.

Threads wander, as they do.

The OP was not about the mental health support for NHS workers or the Police. It was about journalists stressing over the results of an election! Big difference. I think that’s why the subject has made the headlines in some more newspapers today - not just the Telegraph.