Mumsnet or Netmums there is little difference

It all started a few years ago, at a reception in the House of Lords for Salt Awareness week when a Netmums' organiser gave a presentation based on a survey of Netmums users. I felt uncomfortable and made a whispered comment to another guest,"Who are these users? Can we trust these statistics?" He nodded his head in agreement.Without knowing the demographics of the survey participants, we had little idea if the survey was representative. I listened but was unimpressed and clapped half heartedly as the Netmums' representative stood down.

Netmums users have influenced (responded to) the Government's Food Standards Agency on various food related issues but in the run up to the General Election, both Netmums and Netmums have become platforms for the politicians. The websites are celebrating 10th birthdays and increasingly, I feel that their power is not to be rivalled.

The Prime Minister and his wife spoke at Mumsnet's 10th party and less than a week later, Justine Roberts was on the main evening news, discussing the premature sexualisation of girls. It isn't that I don't believe that the views of the users of the websites aren't important; indeed the websites are a source of great support and information to mothers but I'm not so sure the website organisers (unelected to post) should be using their collected data, as a consensus of the views of every mother.

Mumsnet had a well documented sprat with Gina Ford and there were also accusations of bullying amongst its members. However, my real issue is the possible ability of Mumsnetters or Netmums to influence government policy.The websites may be seen as elitist, you can draw your own conclusions from these demographics (from Mumsnet ) but I prefer the word exclusive.I don't think a young single parent will spend her time in an internet cafe, logged onto a website promoting Boden offers or worrying about politicians preferred biscuit choices. I am happy to be corrected on this point and I have asked people, cooking with young mums to ask them if they have internet in the home and therefore access to the websites. If, my own experience is anything to go by, I fear not. Last week a child asked me for a recipe; I offered to email one but was told that there wasn't a computer in the home.I suggest that this child's mother can't participate in either surveys or pose website questions to politicians.

A recent survey by Tate and Lyle in partnership with Mumsnet, produced some incredulous statistics.

"Despite the rise of domestic dads who share childcare duties, 44% of men shun the mixing bowl, sieve and spoon, and only 13% bake with their children each month. Meanwhile 98% of women bake with their children and 67% do so most months." Sorry, I simply cannot believe that Sure Start would feel the need to fund cook start up boxes, if 98% of mums are already baking. Tate and Lyle has replied to my email

"The point you raise is valid however, and in future we will ensure that more details about how a sample group is recruited are included in our press releases."
Sainsbury has also worked with Netmums producing survey results for Mothering Sunday, again unrepresentative.
I was interested to hear the Prime Minister say on Woman's Hour, that child benefit will be dealt with online; I am presuming that the government is serious in its funding for laptops for low income families The internet must in my opinion be accessible to everyone for the views of the users, of either Mumsnet or Netmums to be of value.

Politicians must realise that they have to live in the real not cyber world. Any internet user can post random views in anonymity but if a politician makes rash promises during a website chat he or she will doubtless be held to account for it, in the real world.