OAA Apologise for "Career Women Make Bad Mothers" Campaign

(1281 Posts)
OAA Wed 06-Jan-10 16:16:05

The OAA are running a campaign to demonstrate the power of outdoor advertising to drive people online. This is being done in conjunction with a new website called ?Britainthinks.com? which encourages debate amongst the people of Britain.

We regret any misunderstanding that led to feelings of offence on the part of members of the Mumsnet community.

The intention of the website is to generate debate by posing questions that are deemed to be socially relevant by members of society.

We did not intend to cause any offence and we would stress that the questions posed were not the opinions of the OAA or any of its members.

Three posters were designed to initiate the debate using sport, life and politics and these are supported by dozens of other questions on the website itself.

Regrettably the question relating to ?career women? has caused offence and the OAA unreservedly apologises to anyone who has been offended. This was not our intention and, to ensure that this misunderstanding does not persist, instructions have been given to remove this poster.

Subject to the vagaries of the weather, all copy will be removed as soon as possible. The sites currently carrying this poster will be either blanked-out or carry one of the other designs. The poster will also be removed from the ?Britainthinks.com? website. All Digital posters have already been removed.

FlightAttendant Wed 06-Jan-10 16:18:23

Now that's more like it smile

atlantis Wed 06-Jan-10 16:20:22

There's your poster for you ; The power of the internet mumsnet make us remove poster!!

Metella Wed 06-Jan-10 16:20:27

Fantastic news!!

fair enough
apol accepted (by me at least)

eastendmummy Wed 06-Jan-10 16:21:52

Fantastic! Whoever at the OAA believed that people would not be offended by this statement obviously doesn't live in the real world.

wahwah Wed 06-Jan-10 16:38:07

Hooray! Another step closer to a world fit for our daughters. Well done, chaps.

Ivykaty44 Wed 06-Jan-10 16:41:26

well done girls...grin

StewieGriffinsMom Wed 06-Jan-10 16:45:19

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Metella Wed 06-Jan-10 16:48:34

Okay - this slogan is still on the BritainThinks website - NOT good.

LadyBlaBlah Wed 06-Jan-10 16:50:03

Is that genuine??

mrsbaldwin Wed 06-Jan-10 16:54:42


Great news!

I will call OAA to check this is genuine.

And after that write another post.

mrsbaldwin Wed 06-Jan-10 17:08:41

I just called the OAA to confirm that the statement is genuine.

The lady that answers the phone there says that it is genuine, reporting: 'although I didn't write the statement I was the one who posted it on Mumsnet'.

I asked to speak to Bill Wilson, Director of Operations - she said he had gone home early because of the snow and asked if I could call back tomorrow. I said I would do that.

If the adverts come down online/are covered over in RL then that is a result and the emailing can (in my view anyway) be laid to rest/apology accepted and so on.

It would be good to speak to Mr Wilson, however, because whilst online is easy, RL is in practice more difficult especially in the snow.

What do others who have written emails feel about this?

LadyBlaBlah Wed 06-Jan-10 17:09:07

I suspect it is not since the weather does not affect the removal of the slogan from the website...............it is still there

Harriedandflustered Wed 06-Jan-10 17:12:37

Mrs B - I think this is fantastic news. And all of it engineered and driven by you. <<Manly hug>>

I wonder about the sanity sensitivity of the OAA for having put the advert out in the first place, but at least they have reconsidered. I think the weather permitting thing is okay in principle.

treacletart Wed 06-Jan-10 17:18:22

not there now -

edam Wed 06-Jan-10 17:19:14

Missed the original thread but sounds like this decision is well overdue. says here was dreamed up by someone called Garry Lace - think he should come on here himself and apologise.

Apart from anything else, 'career women' is such an outmoded term. FGS.

chocolatejunkie Wed 06-Jan-10 17:22:35

Been following this thread with interest. Well done everyone, especially MrsB. DH has just emailed me this link to an advertising trade press article


LadyBlaBlah Wed 06-Jan-10 17:23:55

Apparently it is a genuine backtrack apology - Mrs B has confirmed it with the OAA

GetOrfMoiLand Wed 06-Jan-10 17:30:53

Well done Mrs B.

GhoulsAreLoud Wed 06-Jan-10 17:31:18

Oh wow, well done guys, that's brilliant!

policywonk Wed 06-Jan-10 17:33:44

Bloody hell, well done girls.

Now stop mucking about on the internet and go and get the dinner on.

HerBeatitude Wed 06-Jan-10 17:34:06

ROFL at the comment on the mediaweek site - mumsnet = third reich


wahwah Wed 06-Jan-10 17:34:50

Thanks for the link. I see that Gary Lacey still doesn't get it. Perhaps he can explain the thinking process behind choosing the 'career women' slogan rather than something equally ridiculous about another 'minority' group. Or perhaps he can't. Pillock.

fridayschild Wed 06-Jan-10 17:38:02

Well done to the power of mumsnet and also to the OAA. I saw the poster this morning and would have been cross for ages had I not seen the mumsnet thread.

squeaver Wed 06-Jan-10 17:49:36

Oh I missed all this, but well done. Good work all round.

Thought you might all want to know that I have met Gary Lace professionally and he is exactly the type of twunt that you would expect him to be.

domesticslattern Wed 06-Jan-10 18:04:16

Well done sisters.

"Misunderstanding" my arse.

scottishmummy Wed 06-Jan-10 18:10:12

Guardian says ad removed after complaints
Yay,it was vapid and deliberately provocative

rubyslippers Wed 06-Jan-10 18:14:05

>> "The campaign was devised by veteran creative Garry Lace, from the Beta agency, to show the power of billboard advertising as an alternative to digital advertising. He was unavailable for comment at the time of publication"

i bet he was unavailable for comment <<snort>>

well done to MrsBaldwin for kicking this all off

dittany Wed 06-Jan-10 18:16:56

Hi OAA, I've said this on the other thread but if you are genuinely sorry and are also sincere about wanting to provoke debate, how about using some feminist slogans to catch people's attention for your campaign. Things like "Don't be a sexist" or "Womens' rights are human rights". I'm sure it would get the debate moving because unfortunately there are still plenty of unreconstructed sexists around who would take issue with ideas like that.

HerBeatitude Wed 06-Jan-10 18:21:16

Yeah - and loads of them work in the ad industry.

(What percentage of agency board directors are mothers?)

wahwah Wed 06-Jan-10 18:47:01

So they wheel out the girly:

^'The strategy head of Beta, Sharon Johnson, said: "There has been a misunderstanding with an important mothers' forum about this campaign which is about sparking a debate. It is not what the campaign thinks. But rather than offend people the decision has been taken to replace the posters saying 'Working women make bad mothers' with other slogans which work just as effectively."^

Actually, Sharon it is what we think. Your company chose not to spark debate with statements such as 'gay men aren't safe babysitters' or 'poor people shouldn't have children', you thought women were so used to casual sexism that we'd not bother. Shame on you for being part of this nonsense.

Harriedandflustered Wed 06-Jan-10 19:07:50

While we have the OAA here, I'd just like to give their equal opportunities policy a roadtest with three questions:

How many women do you have on your board of directors and what is the ratio of women to men on that board?

How many women executives do you have at sub-board level and what is the ratio of women to men at that level?

How did you happen to pick casual misogyny to initiate a debate?

nickytwotimes Wed 06-Jan-10 19:12:28

An apology is appreciated, but please do not expect us to buy the 'misunderstanding' statement. Yet another insult to intelligence.

HerBeatitude Wed 06-Jan-10 19:13:39

I think % of mothers is more relevant than %of women. It tends to be motherhood which scuppers a woman's career in adland.

Swedington Wed 06-Jan-10 19:14:48

Mrs Baldwin - Now that is how to run a campaign. Well done you, and all the people you motivated to write in. High fives. Respect. And awe. grin

<<glugs celebratory red wine>>

nickytwotimes Wed 06-Jan-10 19:17:44

oh, soory, yes. blush Well done to MrsB and the other writer-iners. smile

Swedington Wed 06-Jan-10 19:22:29

MrsBaldwin - It would be marvellous if the )AA replaced their misguided slogan with "How on earth do men manage to combine a full-time career and children?"

People ask women this all the time. They never ask men.

HerBeatitude Wed 06-Jan-10 19:23:49

I have just noticed that one of my posts from yesterday has been deleted. I have no idea why, I can't remember libelling or personally insulting anybody. hmm

Swedington Wed 06-Jan-10 19:25:14

OAA - Might you let Mumsnet come up with a replacement slogan?

HerBeatitude Wed 06-Jan-10 19:27:16

How about "Men who do more housework get more sex"?

That one's true, btw. (In general, obv - I'm sure there are exceptions.)

Katz Wed 06-Jan-10 19:29:27

well done everyone

justaboutandhernewbaby Wed 06-Jan-10 19:29:43

Whoever you are MrsBaldwin I think I want to marry you.

I'm pretty sure I didn't understand.

If I wrote 'black people steal' on a bus, I would rightly be not allowed to use the defence 'you have misunderstood' when the police came to discuss it with me and press charges would I? Because reasonably some black people might steal, in the same way that some career women probably do make bad mothers.

That's not a misunderstanding. I cannot believe you did not know how offensive that was. So you have not only been hugely offensive but now you are being patronising too!

Pathetic - that's what it is - shame on you! angry

CMOTdibbler Wed 06-Jan-10 19:30:38

I notice that the other slogans used in the campaign are not really controversial, nor do they single out a group.

So, good on you OAA for pulling this offensive, misogynistic ad, but a huge boo hiss for being such twunts as to allow it out in your name to begin with

morningpaper Wed 06-Jan-10 19:30:53

result - I am SURPRISED

well DONE MrsB

Ronaldinhio Wed 06-Jan-10 19:32:50

well done miladies

HerHonesty Wed 06-Jan-10 19:40:37

Im sorry but that apology is a load of f'ing tosh. its not just mumsnetters that are offended - but pretty much every working mother (oh and yes, by the way, some of us work in advertising and marketing too) and also it is a completely irrelevant social question.

lets just sit back and wait and see which group tosser gary managed to piss off next.

HerBeatitude Wed 06-Jan-10 19:43:33

The very term "career women" is so astonishly outdated.

It's like referring to Take That as "a popular beat combo".

(Who are the Beatles?)

latestincarnation Wed 06-Jan-10 19:49:39

Wow! Congratulations MrsBaldwin and all the other writeriners - very impressive result

The apology is however a load of damage limitation tosh that still doesn't address the basic problem: that no one in the making of the campaign realised/cared that the statement was misogynistic crap, inappropriate sexist drivel that if similar had been said about any other group, it would not of been ok'd.

Admen, for example, are...

Oh how marvellous! grin

Crazycatlady Wed 06-Jan-10 20:07:14

OAA, this is the right result that the posters be pulled immediately and I am pleased to see an apology posted here. However I echo others in that there was no misunderstanding present, this was an example of an inappropriate and offensive campaign, no two ways about it.

MrsB I said it on the other thread but just again wanted to say thank you for all your hard work on this and to everyone who got involved. It WAS worth it and it just goes to show what can be achieved when we stand up for what is right.

I agree with you that it would be appropriate to hear from Mr Wilson directly MrsB. Not sure how he'll do that, wonder if he'll be brave enough to tackle breakfast telly?

ImSoNotTelling Wed 06-Jan-10 20:22:44

How did I miss all this?

Well done mrsB.


wmmc like your post about why "misunderstanding" defence is bunch of arse.

squeaver Wed 06-Jan-10 20:23:44

yy OAA and all the twunts at Beta: It's not that we don't GET that it's supposed to be provocative (we may just be women but we're not stupid).

Crazycatlady Wed 06-Jan-10 20:29:38

We still have more work to do.

The phrase 'career women make bad mothers' has been pulled from the front page of the Britain thinks website, but the content is STILL THERE under 'business'. OAA - you need to instruct Beta to remove this immediately.

edam Wed 06-Jan-10 20:44:30

Message deleted by Mumsnet.

squeaver Wed 06-Jan-10 20:48:23

Message deleted by Mumsnet.

RockBird Wed 06-Jan-10 20:54:29

Great result, well done MrsB

I just find those comments underneath so depressing though. So many people who are still mysogynistic pillocks.

Harriedandflustered Wed 06-Jan-10 20:58:13

There were an awful lot of jokes about our Garry on the other thread. And yes, he does have a double R. And all our poems and haikus and limericks have been deleted. In fact I think there are now more deletions than posts ...

So, any posts involving mailing used nappies or the size of anyone's todger are liable to be deleted. Just so you know.

Poor MN Towers. We are making their hair curl and turn grey.

WilfSell Wed 06-Jan-10 20:59:08

Exactly. The comments are precisely why it was important to object. Because we know this would just stir up hatred and as many people have said because women and mothers in particular are such an easy target to patronise and offend.

WilfSell Wed 06-Jan-10 21:00:02

My comment was to rockbird. Not glorifying the idea of MNHQ's hair turning any more grey.

Harried -my limerick is alive and well in other places on the web. And since it's been deleted here I may just have to go see if I can post another few copies with an addendum I may pen this evening. wink

Let's see 'em find every copy if they can.... good luck with that chaps.

I don't like companies that invoke the libel laws when they themselves are in the wrong. It smacks of bullying. I have no doubt Justine will dutifully be forced to remove my posts on the subject on the original thread plus these probably.

Now who wants to link to the grabbed cache google is holding with all your delightful comments? wink

LadyBlaBlah Wed 06-Jan-10 21:25:52

Yours was my favourite choc sad

Why thank you LadyBlaBlah, but I am now removing myself entirely from this subject.

Let's see....we have....

Fear; uncertainty; doubt

My work here is done wink

mumhadenough Wed 06-Jan-10 22:27:34

Well done everyone involved, that was bloody fantastic! I can't believe I missed out on being a part of it all!

dittany Wed 06-Jan-10 22:28:41

The OAA apologise, meanwhile on the other thread there is an adman threatening Mumsnet with legal action.

TheCrackFox Wed 06-Jan-10 22:42:10

Seems a scary sort of apology indeed.

Harriedandflustered Wed 06-Jan-10 22:49:10

<Imagines court case>

Defence counsel: Mr Adman, have you ever masturbated?
Adman: I don't see why that is relevant
Defence counsel: Nevertheless, I would ask you to answer the question, which I shall repreat for you. Have you ever masturbated?
Adman: Well involuntarily perhaps
Defence counsel: You are under oath
Adman: Well yes I have masturbated
Defence counsel: Do you accept that a common term for someone who masturbates is a wanker?
Adman: No, not at all
Defence counsel: I would remind you once more that you are under oath
Adman: Well I have heard the phrase
Defence counsel: Do you accept that you, being an admitted masturbator, might accurately be described as a wanker?
Adman: No not at all
Defence counsel: In what way would it be inaccurate to describe you as a wanker?
Adman <shuffles nervously>: Erm
Defence counsel: My lords, the defence rests its case

HerBeatitude Wed 06-Jan-10 22:51:28

ROFL glad I read that before it gets pulled.

Copy and paste it and send it to Private Eye.

mrsbaldwin Thu 07-Jan-10 06:52:17

A quick post before DS wakes up.

I thought I might, myself, email the OAA's Bill Wilson a short note commending him on his decision to pull the ad and saying that I would note my pleasure at this turnaround with outdoor advertisers eg Kelloggs I had contacted.

I'll do this later and post a model email here so that anyone else who would like to do the same but doesn't have time to compose their own can use.

As for reputational damage to the ad agency - as I said on an earlier post, I'm sure the agency, as part of their communications planning for this campaign must have considered risks, including to the reputation of their own agency as well as to the client. Didn't they?

morningpaper Thu 07-Jan-10 08:23:16

good idea MrsB

Crazycatlady Thu 07-Jan-10 08:33:03

mrsb I would also like to write to Mr Wilson to do the same, but also to point out that the offending content is STILL ON THE BLOODY SITE... OAA must insist it is removed immediately.

I agree re reputational damage - surely an experienced CEO with decades in the industry would have considered the potential fallout from running an offensive campaign? And it's pretty naive in today's world to think you can censor control a debate in the manner they clearly wanted to.

Now good advertising is about clever, powerful comms that persuade your target audience to do something, buy something or behave in a certain way, right? So surely if you're one of the industry's top players who runs a campaign that happens to unexpectedly backfire, you'd be able to dig your way of the reputational crater by using more of that clever talk with media and the public. But not being available for comment, then issuing legal letters smacks of someone who maybe just isn't very good? If they can't defend their campaign through the power of communications then what on earth are they doing? Their key messages to media at launch were all over the place too...

This proves to me just how crass and unprofessional a lot of the advertising industry still really is. Perhaps the OAA would like to try some PR instead wink.

They don't have a legal leg to stand on BTW.

bunnymother Thu 07-Jan-10 08:43:27

Good, am glad OAA made an unreserved apology. As they should - its a deeply offensive slogan, in so many ways, that is damaging to all women, not just mothers who work ("career women" - snort).

Well done Mrs Baldwin. Agree with other posters, too, that the slogan should be removed everywhere immediately.

OAA Thu 07-Jan-10 10:41:52

In realising the offence caused by the ‘career women’ poster which led to the swift withdrawal of the design, we stated that the question posed in no way reflected the thoughts of either the OAA or its members. We would also like to make very clear that this statement did not reflect the views of the advertisers.

Once again we wish to extend our apologies to all parties offended by this design.

StewieGriffinsMom Thu 07-Jan-10 10:58:15

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

mrsbaldwin Thu 07-Jan-10 11:00:18

Here are two model emails that those who are inclined could send to Bill Wilson of the Outdoor Advertising Association and to any large firms of outdoor advertisers they contacted.


This model email to Bill Wilson


Dear Mr Wilson

I’m writing to say how pleased I am that the OAA has decided to take down its [insulting/patronising/disappointing etc] ‘career women make bad mothers’ ads.

Thank you also for your unreserved apology.

I hope, as you say in your statement to Mumsnet that the ads will be taken down as quickly as possible, to avoid causing further offence.

I will be writing to outdoor advertisers that I contacted about your campaign to note that the ads are to be removed.

Yours sincerely

This model email to Chris Wermann of Kelloggs


Dear Mr Wermann

I wrote to you earlier this week about an outdoor advertising campaign sponsored by the Outdoor Advertising Association which used the slogan ‘career women make bad mothers’.

I am very pleased that the OAA has now apologised via a statement on the Mumsnet website for any offence caused by the ad and has issued instructions to its members for it to be withdrawn.

Thank you very much for taking the time to consider this matter.

Yours sincerely

Find other email addresses to write to on the thread containing the original compendium of model letters, here:

I just wrote a long message on the other thread which I won't bore you with by reposting here, but in summary, as someone who is a communications professional, my experience has always been that swift, complete apologies are the best way to defuse this type of situation. The OAA have understood this and have resolved the situation instantly by their approach. Well done to them.

I am surprised that other parties to this debate are not taking the same sensible approach. (Reckon I can say that without being libellous, right?). Can I also say the words 'toys' 'pram' and 'out of' or is that too risky?

Oh and MrsB, I had written to Council Members of the OAA and have written back to them to thank for the swift resolution, so you can add that to your list of damage limitation actions.

mrsbaldwin Thu 07-Jan-10 11:35:56

workingitoutasIgo - this is great

Crazycatlady Thu 07-Jan-10 12:09:04

OAA, while we commend your swift decision to pull the offending slogan, posting here about the 'question posed' is not entirely accurate. The slogan was presented as a statement, identifiable as such by the presence of a full stop as opposed to a question mark.

Will the OAA be reviewing its relationship with Beta as a result of this campaign? £1.25m is an awful lot of money to spend on damaging your reputation. I can't imagine that's something you'll want to repeat.

nicnac73 Thu 07-Jan-10 12:44:25

OAA might you suggest to HWCNBN that he should stop this silly libel business as he is just adding fuel to the fire which is burning both of you.

Hell hath no fury..... you might not want to fan its flames.

domesticslattern Thu 07-Jan-10 14:42:04

Finally this makes Discussion of the Day!

<nods approvingly>

Crazycatlady Thu 07-Jan-10 14:49:58

OAA, when you say you want to make clear that the "career women make bad mothers" slogan did not represent the views of the advertisers, I hope you don't mean Beta, because it could very easily be interpreted from their blog that in fact it is their view... I quote directly:

"I was talking to a child psychologist the other day. They said that any parent who spends more than 55 hours a week at work including travelling time is probably a bad parent.

Doesn't matter what sex you are."

While attempting to backtrack against mothers, Beta have very openly stated here that it in fact is their viewpoint that having a career = bad parent, and have attempted to back up their statement with reference to a child psychologist.

OAA, I ask again, are you going to terminate your relationship with Beta?

alana39 Thu 07-Jan-10 15:00:12

Fantastic, was very surprised. Big round of applause for MrsB and everyone else who supplied contact details and links.

Sorry, just realised forgot the traditional greeting.

OAA, welcome to Mumsnet!

<waves welcomingly>

Message withdrawn

I do not accept that apology (although as a SAHM I suppose it's none of my business).

The ad was not posed as a question, but as a statement. There was no 'misunderstanding' on my part leading to offence. It was a crass, ridiculous generalization inteded to annoy people and so get them to visit a particular website. I am offended at the attempt to manipulate people, waste their time and cause distress purely to prove that people look at ads on the sides of buses.

I have just e-mailed to OAA telling them what I think of their 'apology'.

itsmeolord Thu 07-Jan-10 15:42:45

I find it fairly offensive actually that the reason this has been pulled is not because the statement was offensive to all women but because it was highlighted on an influential womens website.

That shows me that there is no real understanding of what was so wrong about the ad, more a pr exercise to save their own skins.

I am a working mum, I am not a bad parent, in fact I am a very good parent, both my children are happy and well settled. I have fought tooth and nail though, to get a decent career and to get as much equality as I can within that career. Which is no mean feat when you work in a techy industry such as mine.
The ad only served to give many misogynistic members of my industry yet another reason to attempt to sneer at working mothers.

You see the problem with the ad is that it is aimed at people who are rushing about, will see a very quick snapshot and take that as fact.
It will sit in the subconcious and fester for those who are either too narrow minded or too biased to apply subjective thought to the statement in the first place.

SilverSixpence Thu 07-Jan-10 15:43:02

great - i was really offended by that ad when i saw it. Just what working mothers need!

domesticslattern Thu 07-Jan-10 15:51:14

The other thing about the ad is that, even once it has been taken down, women will subconsciously think:
Last time I saw that bus shelter, it contained an ad which personally attacked me and made me angry all day long.
Now that bus shelter wants me to buy perfume/ washing up liquid/ gas/ whatever.
Well, fuck those ads and the pig they rode in on. Outdoor advertising isn't on my side, it just makes me angry.

Done your job OAA?
Still claiming I "misunderstood" you?

SilverSixpence Thu 07-Jan-10 15:51:42

and will still be making a complaint too.

LadyBlaBlah Thu 07-Jan-10 16:21:30

Even yesterday, Beta have stated their case with regards to this issue. This was posted by Robert Campbell of the BritainThinks campaign (read Beta, he is one of the founders)

"Good parenting is about love and support and understanding. And a load of other things. But its also about being there. I try to spend time with my children every morning and evening. But its hard to balance work and life. The 55 hour rule is just a handy reminder. Secretly I think a lot of people with careers know that it affects their relationship with their children. We just don't like to admit it"

So, they were expressing an opinion.

I wonder if they able to back up this claim, or whether a nameless 'Child Psychologist' is it. As I said on the other thread (probably deleted) there is no such thing as a Child Psychologist (unless you got your qualifications from one of those adverts on t'telly) and give us EVIDENCE, not just anecdotal evidence. That statement is utter rubbish, and is nowhere near being a fact.

But, OAA, there is clear evidence that Beta were not simply trying to get a debate started, they were indeed expressing their opinion.

<That quote is on this page here in the comments section:

community.brandrepublic.com/blogs/campbelllacebetablog/archive/2010/01/04/good-fathers-make-bad-empl oyees.aspx .

abitchilly Thu 07-Jan-10 16:22:39

Erm...so they didn't realise this could conceivably cause offence?

Now it's 'oops sorry, we'll take it down'.

In the meantime this whole debate is making the newspapers.

Job done, jolly good.

Keep going for the easy targets won't you?

I have written to Bill. Thank you for providing his email address. Very useful.

gagamama Thu 07-Jan-10 16:47:01

Fantastic news that the ad has been pulled. Unfortunate that the OAA feel that we 'misunderstood' the purpose of the advertisement or that we though these were actually 'their' views. We understood perfectly well that the advertisement and slogan was intended to cause shock, offence and outrage and to provoke people to visit their website to defend themselves. A website which was set up to prove to power of outdoor advertising and whose hit count will be used in sales pitches for future clients. What we opposed what that a professional organisation felt that a crass an insensitive statement causing offence to a large number of people for the sake of 'debate' on their sales-tool site was well-judged. It was not.

Well done to Mumsnetters for the outcome though!

annh Thu 07-Jan-10 16:54:15

If Robert Campbell from Beta thinks that "Secretly I think a lot of people with careers know that it affects their relationship with their children. We just don't like to admit it" then why does their ad not say "Career people make bad parents". Why only pick on the female half of the equation, Robert? Of course, he does also say "I try to spend time with my children every morning and evening". Oh well, that's fine then Robert, that's you off the hook - not good enough for the "career woman" but absolutely fine for the "career father"!

kizzie Thu 07-Jan-10 17:24:17

Good result ! smile

Sadly though I can just see the OAA at their (imagined) friday weekly catch up slyly patting each other on the back for proving just how big an impact outdoor advertising can have.... angry

bossykate Thu 07-Jan-10 17:26:25

mrsbaldwin for prime minister! smile

WELL DONE to you and other campaigners!

peppapighastakenovermylife Thu 07-Jan-10 17:51:44

Its still on a bill board here - I drive past it on my way to work hmm

notevenamousie Thu 07-Jan-10 19:14:09

Thank you and well done Mrs Baldwin. I could witter about freedom of speech verses the right to not have to live with judgemental arrogant idiots but I won't.

I am stupidly, childishly proud of being quoted in the Guardian!!!! The ultimate irony of course, I can't tell anyone because then I'll have to name change, I talk about a lot here - life, love, parenting, weaknesses. I may never have won an MN competition or managed quote of the week but I am a rare MNer - I was quoted accurately!

It's a shame because there could have been a reasonable discussion about how bloody hard it is to need to work and raise your child but instead now there is lots of judgemental and stereotypical rubbish. Meanwhile I worked long hours today as senior colleagues off and my 3yo cuddled me on the bus home. It will always be such a mixture and I am glad to be in such good and honest company here.

morningpaper Thu 07-Jan-10 19:15:22

ahhhh notevenamousie what a lovely post

notevenamousie Thu 07-Jan-10 19:21:31

What's the 55 hour rule, btw?

Crazycatlady Thu 07-Jan-10 19:26:45

There's no such thing mousie. Lovely post btw.

gothicmama Thu 07-Jan-10 19:28:50

it is still on a bus shelter which i drive past - if it wasnot reading the thread on here I would never knowit was fot OAA asthe print explaining this is not visibleasyou drive past

Crazycatlady Thu 07-Jan-10 19:34:13

It's been more than 24 hours since the OAA confirmed the ads would be pulled, come on guys, this is too slow. Everyone is watching, waiting and ready to start emailing/phoning press offices and journo contacts if you don't stand by your word.

HerBeatitude Thu 07-Jan-10 19:36:57

To be fair, the snow must have had an effect on how soon the posters could come down.

Crazycatlady Thu 07-Jan-10 19:40:38

Not in central London though.

dittany Thu 07-Jan-10 19:43:47

Don't the posters stay up until the next campaign starts to run though? They have to put something in its place.

SydneyScarborough Thu 07-Jan-10 19:44:16

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SydneyScarborough Thu 07-Jan-10 19:49:33

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Crazycatlady Thu 07-Jan-10 19:51:52

The OAA has agreed to replace or blank out the posters at the earliest available opportunity. If they stay up until the next campaign starts then to say that "all copy is being removed as soon as possible" wouldn't be true.

DuelingFanjo Thu 07-Jan-10 19:54:29

I hate some of the stuff people have commented under the article in Media Week. They honestly believe that 'mums' have created an almighty fuss about nothing. Some of the comments make me think of that pathetic exchange from boys who fancy a girl in school but as soon as they get the brush off start calling said girl a lesbian - if you know what I mean.

It seems some people just can't accept that women have an opinion which isn't always based on gender and that opposition to a statement such as the one used in this campaign is just a load of mums getting their knickers in a twist.

Crazycatlady Thu 07-Jan-10 20:01:33

Agree DF.

Your post also really made me giggle, duelingfanjo talking about getting knickers in a twist, tee hee.

EightiesChick Thu 07-Jan-10 20:14:21

Good outcome - I had read the other thread but not got round to posting. Ridiculous comment from Garry:

He said: "The campaign was designed to start a debate about the issue rather than criticise career women, which would clearly be wholly inappropriate and utterly ridiculous."

If it would be 'wholly inappropriate' to criticise career women, how can a statement doing just that be placed to 'start a debate about the issue'? If something can be debated that suggests it's acceptable to have a number of views on it. Rubbish.

The sad fact seems to be that the 'we didn't think it would offend anyone' line has presumably been seen as viable because women in general are not seen as a group who anyone has to avoid offending anymore. It's the dream of the feminist backlash: those pesky women bleated for more rights and got them and they still complain! How unreasonable. Now, many years past the point where we should have been dealing with this stuff, there is a renewed expectation that we have to just put up with these comments and 'get a sense of humour'. Really, really, really irritating. BUT - I mustn't let this wipe out my pleasure at the ad being removed (tapping fingers while I wait for this to be completed - as of 8pm tonight the topic, in question form, is still up on the 'Business' section of the Britainthinks website).

OAA, I'll be paying more attention to outdoor advertising in future - with the aim of checking out who else does it and making sure this is a single offence, and I don't have to avoid buying any more of your clients' products.

Beta, if I manage to find out what other campaigns you run, I will certainly be avoiding any other products you help to advertise.

Crazycatlady Thu 07-Jan-10 20:18:55

Eightieschick, they represent Thomas Cook, the NSPCC and Jackpot Joy.

Crazycatlady Thu 07-Jan-10 20:21:58

Oh and I agree it is riling to still see the content on the site, albeit in question format. But what's reassuring is that most of the content has been posted by Beta and not real people, who thankfully aren't being fooled by the 'independent forum' line hmm

morningpaper Thu 07-Jan-10 20:26:40

If I see any (apparently it is nearly 25% of all billboard sites? They obviously can't SELL any of the space) I shall be adding "ass" after BAD

nannynick Thu 07-Jan-10 20:50:26

Is the ASA taking action over this? Are they even able to take any action, now that the OAA have said they will remove the ad?

squeaver Thu 07-Jan-10 20:54:30

Nick, the problem with the ASA is that it takes them so long to rule on anything the campaign is usually long finished by then.

And the most they can do is stop a campaign running or being run again, so they'll consider it a done deal.

Crazycatlady Thu 07-Jan-10 20:58:01

Yep these guys knew exactly what they were doing with regards to potential for ASA involvement - why do you think the campaign is only set to last two weeks? Just long enough to really offend people but not long enough to get into trouble with the ASA. That's why we've had to hit them reputationally by writing to Beta's clients and potential clients and writing to OAA's members and big outdoor spenders. And by keeping up the MN thread, blogging and tweeting of course wink

nannynick Thu 07-Jan-10 20:58:41

I am surprised the advert met conditions of [[http://cap.org.uk/The-Codes/CAP-Code/CAP-Code-Item.aspx?q=CAP+CodeGeneral+Rules5++Decency+(ie+av oiding+serious+or+widespread+offence) CAP Code 5.1

To save you looking it up:
Marketing communications should contain nothing that is likely to cause serious or widespread offence. Particular care should be taken to avoid causing offence on the grounds of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation or disability. Compliance with the Code will be judged on the context, medium, audience, product and prevailing standards of decency."

Both the words Women and Mothers was used in the ad, thus I feel it could be said that the ad could cause offence to Women, be they mothers or not.

Crazycatlady Thu 07-Jan-10 20:59:27

Agreed nannynick

morningpaper Thu 07-Jan-10 21:06:50

The ASA will have to formally investigate the complaints now. It will most likely take a few months.

When an advertiser withdraws an advert in cases of offence, it is basically admitting culpability. As far as I am aware, the ASA has never concluded a complaint as being "Not Upheld" in cases where an advertiser has withdrawn an advert, particularly in this medium. As far as I can see, the complaints are therefore likely to be upheld - against the Outdoor Advertising Association itself, which is extremely embarassing for them.

Normally, breaches against taste and decency on poster ads would also mean that the advertiser is unable to run advertisements in future without having them pre-vetted by the ASA. Also very embarassing, particularly for the agency.

The ASA will take time to act but I think there will be red-faces all round.

The industry might like to snicker at the toothlessness of the ASA, but a public telling-off, even by a teacher you don't like much, is always extremely humiliating.

kissmummy Thu 07-Jan-10 21:11:15

one of these posters is just near our home and I hated it.
what are "career women" ?? does anyone ever talk about "career men" ?? unbelievable that we're still stuck in this dark age. yet i still hear the expression "career women" all the time.

nannynick Thu 07-Jan-10 21:21:34

Never heard of the OAA before this thread... anyone else in that camp? I'm surely not the only one who has never heard of them.

Opps, my link to the CAP Code failed... will try another link, this time to the main CAP Code website.

Crazycatlady Thu 07-Jan-10 21:26:20

I doubt very much you're alone nick. I had heard of them but if I hadn't spent 10 years working in marketing/PR I don't think I'd have any reason to know who they are.

morningpaper Thu 07-Jan-10 21:27:43

OAA yes v boring industry body

Just in charge of billboards

Do you know that billboards were originally "invented" to screen off bomb sites during the war?

EightiesChick Thu 07-Jan-10 21:41:13

Crazycatlady Thanks for that - I'm going to email Thomas Cook and the NSPCC and tell them that their association with this agency damages their brand in my view. Don't think I was ever likely to consume Jackpot Joy's services tbh.

Crazycatlady Thu 07-Jan-10 21:43:23

Lol nor me eightieschick. I posted press office details for the other two organisations earlier up the thread if you don't already have them.

Crazycatlady Thu 07-Jan-10 21:43:55

Sorry, they're on the original thread, not this one

pixiestix Thu 07-Jan-10 22:03:55

Only just seen this - well done Mrs Baldwin*!! Very glad that there are women like you out there.

MumOfAPickle Thu 07-Jan-10 22:47:33

Totally missed all this. I did see the ad fleetingly and did think WTF? But just assumed (as it was literally a split second glance) that I missed something. I suppose that's half the problem....its that insidious reinforcement of a completely ridiculous idea.

So, well done everyone. Very, very impressive work. Just such a shame it had to be done.

So,, can I just be clear (as I missed the original thread). The billboard was for OAA (who are basically just a governing body for billboard advertising) and the campaign was devised by Beta (who are an ad agency who also work for the NSPCC etc.)?

morningpaper Thu 07-Jan-10 22:48:54

The campaign was done by (Beta)

don't forget the ()s

weebump Thu 07-Jan-10 23:26:04

Well, their campaign certainly worked, didn't it!

BecauseImGarry Thu 07-Jan-10 23:29:36

In what way?

weebump Fri 08-Jan-10 00:09:20

"The OAA are running a campaign to demonstrate the power of outdoor advertising to drive people online. This is being done in conjunction with a new website called ?Britainthinks.com? which encourages debate amongst the people of Britain. "

Now we've heard of the OAA and "Britainthinks.com", their advertising drove people on-line, and encouraged (very heated) debate. Job done.

I certainly don't like the ad. It's controversy for the sake of controversy. But in some parts of the media that's considered a success. Unfortunately.

Well done for getting them to take down the ads.

FlightAttendant Fri 08-Jan-10 07:16:36

No, no Weebump, it didn't drive anyone online...not as evidenced by this thread, and the other one, in any case. We were all already here! Only a few of us even saw the ad.

and I doubt very much that many of us went over to BT to contribute to their little debate.

SorryBeta Fri 08-Jan-10 08:41:28

Robert and I would like to apologise to anyone we've offended with one of the posters we created for the OAA.

The reason we've waited until now to apologise is that the strength and nature of the reaction to the poster, specifically on mumsnet, shocked us. At first we were not sure what to do.

It had not been our intention to cause such offence, nor to attract such abuse.

Our intention was to provoke discussion. We believed that both the poster and the content of the Britainthinks website reflected this. We accept we got this wrong.

It has been suggested that we are about to commence legal proceedings against mumsnet. This is categorically not the case.

We have asked that they operate within their own editorial guidelines which they now are doing.

We are profoundly sorry. We hope our apology is accepted.

Garry and Robert.

DuelingFanjo Fri 08-Jan-10 08:49:58

Not all of the response was abusive though, was it.

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 09:05:39

Thank you for your apology, (Beta).

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 09:22:24

Yes (Beta) thank you very much for your apology

BecauseImGarry Fri 08-Jan-10 09:24:47

Yes, thanks for the apology. But why are you denying the legal bit?

FlightAttendant Fri 08-Jan-10 09:30:36

Guys what's with the parentheses please?

elastamum Fri 08-Jan-10 09:30:38

Thanks for the apology. I havent posted before but I did complain to the ASA.

I thought the campaign was crass, offensive and a bit of a cheap shot at a group that you thought you could get away with taking a pop at to raise a storm. It certainly did that! I am also a marketing director and I was stunnned that you let anything quite so ill judged out of the door.

I am a also a lone parent who works extremely hard to support my family and do the best job I can at bringing up my kids. My boys know full well mummy works hard but they also know she loves them, looks after them and puts food on the table. I dont think that makes me or millions of other people like me a bad parent. Maybe you should try it sometime, its really not that easy.

In future before you target a group why not try walking a day in their shoes?

BecauseImGarry Fri 08-Jan-10 09:31:55

Hmm. Elastamum, I think it's called 'market research'. I can't be sure, as I think it might be a bit of a new fangled thing in the 1950s world.

mrsbaldwin Fri 08-Jan-10 09:33:45

Some more reading - Susie Rushton commenting in today's Independent

Advertising its own failure

How not to start a debate: this week the Outdoor Advertising Association launched a series of bus-side adverts with provocative slogans designed to show off the impact of their most prominent sites. They kicked off this national campaign with a poster that read "Career Women Make Bad Mothers", which was, according to Beta, the agency behind it, intended as "a portal for debate".

Oddly enough, plenty of women didn't find the poster particularly conducive to reasoned discussion, and on Wednesday the OAA found itself the target of a campaign by Mumsnet and was forced to take the 11,500 ads down. What's bemusing is why an advertising body chose such a lame creative idea to promote its own product. We all know the advertising industry is in dire straits. This only advertised their desperation. Why stop at using working mothers as a "hot topic"? Why not promote debate with assertions that "All Northerners are criminals" or "It's time to close our borders"?

Link to Susie Rushton's comment page here:
www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/susie-rushton-enjoy-the-travel-chaos-while-it-lasts-18611 99.html
(Scroll to the bottom to read what I have copied and pasted here)

mrsbaldwin Fri 08-Jan-10 09:35:03

And as I posted to the other thread thanks for your apology Beta. Looking forward to seeing some more inspiring campaigns from you in the future.

LadyBlaBlah Fri 08-Jan-10 09:36:26

I think Garry and Robert have never had anyone stand up to them before.........they clearly only employ 'yes' men/women and probably rule by intimidation and force, which is why this campaign got out in the first place, and why they "were so shocked at the reaction"

idealcamel Fri 08-Jan-10 09:59:12

More fun reading - apparently you lot have caused an international feminist blogoverse stir:


mumbrella.com.au/the-outdoor-industry-doesnt-need-to-be-offensive-to-prove-its-worth-15086?utm_sourc e=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+mumbrella+%28mUmBRELLA%29&utm_content=Google+Reade r

I missed all this kicking off, but am profoundly grateful that you all did kick off.

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 10:08:32

I am really boggle-eyed that the response to this ad wasn't foreseen. I Showed a picture of the ad on the bus to my 17 year old son and he asked what was it advertising? And when I explained he said: "Crude".

alana39 Fri 08-Jan-10 10:28:38

Thank you for your apology (Beta). I would be concerned about your shock at the reaction your campaogn drew though - perhaps you and your staff need some training organised to guide you through some of the social changes that have taken place since 1950 so you have a better understanding of the likely reaction to any similarly lame ads in future.

HerBeatitude Fri 08-Jan-10 10:34:00

I read the Australian mag link and was amused by the last comment - "It's offline trolling"

I think that summed it up really, v. aposite.

WorkingItOutAsIGarry Fri 08-Jan-10 10:34:58

Garry and Robert, thank you for your gracious and full apology. Apology accepted (but don't do it again sweeties, as we will be watching you).

SilverStuddedBlue Fri 08-Jan-10 11:45:45

I agree with many of the postings - and much has been said about personal insult and hurt. Less about the potential for further ramifications in RL.

Does the 'creative' who penned the statement have any concept of how hard it is to maintain a career when you have children? When you are conscientious at work, a team player, but treat your children's needs as most important?

If the OAA and advertising company had thought this one through they'd have realised that there are a lot more issues lurking under the surface for working mothers. Especially those who are still trying to work hard at a career, utilising flexible working arrangements, whilst putting family first.

It's not just how I feel seeing that slogan, it's also about how work colleagues who also see the slogan might feel about the working mums on their team. That slogan has the potential to sow the seed of, or fertilize, a nasty weed. Because isn't that what advertising is about - planting thoughts, to sell products or grab attention?

This isn't a trivial issue. Is an apology enough? I suppose what damage there will be is done.

And finally, so why didn't Garry write the same slogan, but with reference to his own gender?

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 11:48:19

I agree Silver

It's just SO depressing to think that a group of supposedly intelligent people sat down and thought that such casual sexism was a perfectly acceptable campaign slogan.

elkiedee Fri 08-Jan-10 12:08:39

I've not actually seen the ad but it sounds totally outrageous, well done to MrsB and everyone else who protested.

dittany Fri 08-Jan-10 12:28:01

Well done for the apology (Beta). You need to get your damage limitation in earlier the next time though. Why were you asking for personal details of some of us from Mumsnet if it wasn't for possible legal action?

I still think if you and the OAA are really sincere in your apologies you could turn this around with some positive messages on women's rights on your buses and billboards. People will still talk about them.

dittany Fri 08-Jan-10 12:30:46

P.S. Next year find something different from tired old sexism and objectification of women for your office "christmas card".

squeaver Fri 08-Jan-10 12:51:33

Dear Garry and Robert

You know this thing that you're trying to encourage people to visit with your ads, the internet or whatever it's called? You might have noticed that people use it as a way to express their opinions and that it's pretty free-flowing, and sometimes that means they get a bit het-up and maybe even say things that you might class as "abusive".

Perhaps you should have had a look before you took on the brief.

Also, when people want to comment on things online, they tend to go to a website they know and use regularly, not one that you (presumably expensively) conjured up out of thin air for the self-serving purposes of you and your client.

Just a couple of tips for the future.

Oh, apology accepted btw.

DuelingFanjo Fri 08-Jan-10 13:01:05

Were they really asking for peoples personal details?

LadyBlaBlah Fri 08-Jan-10 13:03:45

Indeed they were - not sure what they wanted to do with them - but a list was produced of people they would like to contact. Sssssssstrange how their attitude 'changed' in a day hmm

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 13:04:53

Might the OAA allow us to submit a suitable slogan to replace the removed slogan?

Can you believe we still have Page 3 girls in 2010?

meltedchocolate Fri 08-Jan-10 13:49:30

Swed are you gonna start a petition on here against page three girls aimed at the Sun paper?

SorryBeta Fri 08-Jan-10 14:23:28

Dear mumsnet community.

As suggested in some of the posts in this thread, we’ve been back to our clients at the OAA and asked if they’re are prepared to let the mumsnet community create a poster.

They are. The poster would be on a topic of the mumsnet community’s choice.

The posters would go up on digital sites on Monday. So if your community is interested, you would have to work quickly.

The conditions are that the poster is branded/cobranded Britainthinks – the OAA are also prepared to create a mums’ channel on Britainthinks if you wish – and that it conforms with the various rules and regulations of poster advertising.

(Beta) will give you all the help we can to make this happen.

Are you on for it? And if so, how would you like to proceed?



BecauseImGarry Fri 08-Jan-10 14:26:50

Do we get a fee for it?

WilfSell Fri 08-Jan-10 14:27:44

Really? Fuck me.

SydneyScarborough Fri 08-Jan-10 14:28:48

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BecauseImGarry Fri 08-Jan-10 14:28:57

Don't think that would make such a good slogan Wilf.

WilfSell Fri 08-Jan-10 14:30:31


No. As I said, I could never work in advertising.

Some bloody good haikus on that other thread though.

squeaver Fri 08-Jan-10 14:30:50

Oops I think I was just a little bit sick in my mouth.

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 14:31:26

I want a fee. Three chocolate hobnobs.

SnowWorm Fri 08-Jan-10 14:31:48

Oh, FGS, please don't cooperate with this. Leave them alone. Don't help them to change their screw-up into some free publicity. MN isn't a publicity machine.

AitchTwoOhOneOh Fri 08-Jan-10 14:31:54

hmm but britainthinks is a bogus advertising hoarding, isn't it?

AitchTwoOhOneOh Fri 08-Jan-10 14:33:11

agree with the worm. nice try, though, garry, but we'd be looking for about £1.25m before we'd consider it.

bluesky Fri 08-Jan-10 14:33:29

agree with snowworm,

walk away

dittany Fri 08-Jan-10 14:33:36

How about a feminist channel (Beta)?

The problem with these adverts is that they were sexist. They insulted all women by putting sexism in the public space, not only mothers who work outside the home who were the main target, and it was feminist criticisms you were on the receiving end of. If it wasn't for feminism, women in particular mothers, wouldn't have careers for you to insult in the first place.

You want talking points. People will talk about feminsm, both positive and negative. Stand your sexism on its head.

Sorrybeta, you are in luck then, as there are many many Mnetters who are both mothers and work in the media!

Such a pool of talent at your disposal!

So I suppose you need topic ideas?

I suggest starting a new thread then to make sure everyone sees it and can contribute

word of advise, stay away from bf/ff and sahm/wahm stuff..cos if you thought the original ad was controversial, you ain't seen nothing yet...

advice, even, I never said we could either spell or type...

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 14:35:01

The thing is, and I didn't want to piss all over OAA acting so quickly, is that I don't think the aim of all this is going to be achieved. You will only get ranters on the board I reckon.

Opinion boards tend to spring up organically or are based on a specific interest. The only people motivated to post on a Speaker's Corner type board will be, well, the kind of people you get at Speaker's Corner. Passionate for sure, but massively in a minority and often talking to themselves.

Sorry, just can't see it taking off.

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 14:35:38

It's too generic a concept I guess but will go and have a look at it.

dittany Fri 08-Jan-10 14:36:44

"the OAA are also prepared to create a mums’ channel on Britainthinks if you wish"

We've got Mumsnet for this if you hadn't noticed.

squeaver Fri 08-Jan-10 14:37:48

yy that's the MOST patronising statement yet.

SnowWorm Fri 08-Jan-10 14:38:11

I really hope that MNHQ haven't heard of the sleezy co-habitation proposal, and haven't given it the go-ahead.

SleepingLion Fri 08-Jan-10 14:38:23

Where did our haikus go?

SorryBeta Fri 08-Jan-10 14:39:07

No. You don't get a fee. But you get a poster. If you want a fee (Beta) are prepared to make a donation of £1000 to a charity of your choice. We're going to leave this thread for a while so you can decide what you want to do. Our offer is genuine. We are genuinely sorry about what has happened and would like to make amends in this way. But as we said you would have to work fast. Decide what you want do and we'll be back at 5pm to see if you want to take the offer up. We would then need a poster decided upon by your community and agreed with the OAA within 48 hours.Best.(Beta)

On a serious note, we are not here to promote the OAA, so there is little point in asking us to come up with concepts that do just that and don't offend, well, pretty much everyone. That is your creatives job, surely?

I am sure you can manage it by yourselves. And also, we are pretty expensive. Your eyes would water at how much I used to charge for copywriting....

SnowWorm Fri 08-Jan-10 14:40:53

I pledge £5 to an agreed charity on condition that Beta isn't allowed to get into bed with MN. Anyone join me?

dittany Fri 08-Jan-10 14:43:05

One poster. How many sites would this poster go up on?

Would it go on every billboard site and bus side that your "Career women make bad mothers" were stuck to?

SydneyScarborough Fri 08-Jan-10 14:43:07

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

dittany Fri 08-Jan-10 14:44:16

If they put a poster up saying "Sexism damages women and girls" over every "Career Women make bad mothers" poster, I'd support it.

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 14:44:24

I can't even find the site via Google so have given up. Beta, you have to pay the fee if you want to advertise it and put it in the right section so please don't just post it here.

I love coming up with slogans but wouldn't if I didn't know what it would be directing people too and whilst I appreciate the offer and can see how it is trying to make amends, I don't think it's going to come off on the back of this.

Unless you're happy with some MN ones.

I'd go for 'mumsnet: just do it'!

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 14:45:36

directing to, to

squeaver Fri 08-Jan-10 14:46:16

But, Beta, we (well, I for one) don't really care about helping a trade organisation persuade brands that using outdoor advertising is a good idea.

And we don't need a website to discuss these and other issues - we've got one right here. And there's plenty of ocntroversial and hotly-debated stuff posted on here every single day.

I bet the traffic to your Britain Thinks site is miniscule compared to the traffic to Mumsnet.

So, again, why? Why would we?

(And I know some people have suggested it, so if they want to do it, fine. But these are my reasons for saying no)

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 14:46:26

I think we should say yes to this offer.

It seems churlish not to take the opportunity of getting a good message out there.


dittany Fri 08-Jan-10 14:46:52

But this isn't about Mumsnet or mums at the heart of it, it's about a group of men plastering the country in sexism using mothers as the target.

Do not do this.

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 14:48:42

What's the site like though Swedes?

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 14:49:33

Who cares that there is a side benefit for OAA, it doesn't matter.

They will have their side benefit if we don't take them up on it.


AitchTwoOhOneOh Fri 08-Jan-10 14:49:33

it's not really a site... what's the long term commitment to running it after the campaign is over?

DollyMessiter Fri 08-Jan-10 14:49:42


bluesky Fri 08-Jan-10 14:49:49

it's for them, it's not for us!

ZephirineDrouhin Fri 08-Jan-10 14:50:09

I'm with SnowWorm on this. Don't do it.

SnowWorm Fri 08-Jan-10 14:50:58

No Swedes no! What good would come of a slogan on a digital billboard or whatever? It would have to be a hefty social benefit to outweigh the seediness of throwing MN's lot in with this failed campaign. Will society be changed by eight or nine MN-crafted words? Will it heck as like. Will Beta be less deeply in the shit? Yes.

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 14:51:50

How about it they put the Mumsnet logo on in equal size?

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 14:52:29

Oh can't we even have "(Beta) make sexist ads" ?

(NB that was a provocative statement intended to spark debate)

No I suppose not

I can't understand all the blardy paragraphs with uncessary parentheses. It sounds like Stephen Hawkins is in my head when I read it

Crazycatlady Fri 08-Jan-10 14:52:49

Don't think so Beta. We know you're desperate to regain control of your messages and turn the campaign around but I doubt many MNers will want to work with you now, or in the future. I certainly don't. How cheeky angry.

WilfSell Fri 08-Jan-10 14:53:08

Perhaps better 'making up for it' would include Beta making sure its own working practices are up to scratch:

- a gender/parenting audit of all its staff. Over the last 5 years, how many promotions and pay rises have been made to men and women? Further broken down by parenting status and age of youngest child?

- insisting on a 45 hour working week maximum for all employees, with paid overtime on a voluntary basis, and a clear statement that 'presenteeism' will not impact upon promotability

- family-friendly work policies, supported and demonstrated by senior management, to include: the offer of work from home for portions of the week; the offer of job-sharing and part-time work at ALL levels of seniority, with similar commitment to work out promotion opportunities

- a commitment to get an outside agency to survey women employees confidentially to assess and act upon levels of casual sexism in the office and in the associated hospitality etc..

I'm sure we could come up with a few more...

dittany Fri 08-Jan-10 14:53:31

Yes they're just trying to use the Mumsnet brand to boost their damaged image and garner more PR.

Do it without the Mumsnet branding (Beta). Go on, put up a pro-woman slogan, you know you can do it.

Crazycatlady Fri 08-Jan-10 14:54:09

Swedes, collaberating with these guys in any way after the widespread offence they have caused really doesn't appeal. At all. Ever.

WilfSell Fri 08-Jan-10 14:54:44

And indeed the OOA could do the same...

I forgot to add a gender equality statement available for all staff.

SydneyScarborough Fri 08-Jan-10 14:56:39

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BecauseImGarry Fri 08-Jan-10 14:56:51

And for my equally huge professional fee, I'd be delighted to research the campaign properly for you.

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 14:57:08

Well maybe there would be good to come from it. I don't think we would be throwing our lot in with them at all. We would be providing them with a line of copy. Something that just might be of social benefit.

Sometimes you have to accept that people make mistakes and move on. We are where we are. We can't change that unfortunate slogan now.

Bloody hell. All those buses.

mrsbaldwin Fri 08-Jan-10 14:59:32

LOL at 'eyewateringly expensive' MadameDeFarge. And the suggestion of a £1.25m fee to MN. Now that would come in handy in advance of the next (threatened) libel action.

Your apology is appreciated. However, the 'Mumsnet dreams up poster campaign' idea is probably the one you should have come up with in the first place.

The other ad agencies and PR firms who have been keeping an eye on this thread may want to note Beta's suggestion though, for their own future, well-planned and executed campaigns.

SydneyScarborough Fri 08-Jan-10 14:59:44

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 14:59:44

SydneyScarborough - But also remember the saying "Don't cut your nose off to spite your face" and "don't shoot yourself in the foot".

Sometimes you have to just think about what you want to get out of a situation.

Crazycatlady Fri 08-Jan-10 15:00:56

Sydney you are right. This is absolutely about them trying to save face. We're not that silly Garry.

YOU, Garry, are the one being paid to run this campaign so YOU come up with a catchy piece of copy. We don't want anything to do with it.

SnowWorm Fri 08-Jan-10 15:01:06

Joint new site could be called 'Alpha Mummies and Beta Admen: By Parents for the Advertising Industry'

ZephirineDrouhin Fri 08-Jan-10 15:02:45

grin Brilliant, SnowWorm. We have our slogan.

SydneyScarborough Fri 08-Jan-10 15:02:54

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BecauseImGarry Fri 08-Jan-10 15:03:53



I reckon the best thing they could do is do a campaign saying ads are mostly bollox...

that'll be££squillions for original concept, please...

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 15:05:26

I'm not suggesting we take them up on the offer of the site. But the posters. Arghhhh Have you any idea how much such a campaign would cost?

There are so many good things that we could say. What a waste.


SydneyScarborough Fri 08-Jan-10 15:05:51

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 15:06:49

I do sympathise Swedes, especially with all the crap posters around London with crying women being raped by unlicenced cab drivers hmm

domesticslattern Fri 08-Jan-10 15:08:13

This is the man who a few hours ago sent Justine a lawyer's letter stating:

"I will now engage in a process to ensure that it never happens again for anyone and that we are compensated for the hurt,corporate loss and reputational damage that we have suffered as a result of your inability to moderate your medium properly."

and demanding the names and addresses of individual Mnetters.

He has now taken some serious crisis management advice, namely:

Step away from the shovel.

And I see no reason why we should all roll over and allow him to tickle our tummies.

As Sydney says, "This is about them saving face, not giving us a voice. Please, don't fall for it." Hear hear.

BecauseImGarry Fri 08-Jan-10 15:08:27

Can anyone tell me why the haiku thread was pulled though? I didn't see it to the end, but I thought it was really funny.

Crazycatlady Fri 08-Jan-10 15:09:19

I know Swede... well the Beta guys must be able to come up with something. They do not need our help. The only reason they want our help is to try and make themselves look a little less silly than they do. C'mon Sharon, give them a hand, you're a mum aren't you?

SnowWorm Fri 08-Jan-10 15:09:53

He only mentions posters on digital sites. Would they also go to outdoor sites? I'd still say no either way, put I take your point swedes a leeeetle bit about the possibility of missing a chance to say something. I seriously doubt it would have any benefit beyong making MNers feel all excited and important -- and gving MN Limited a free publicity outing.

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 15:10:10

Well quite, MP. I think we should look at the potential greater good rather than the wrong that has already been done. And can't now be changed.


morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 15:11:20

I suppose the trouble is that the wrong only happened about 14 minutes ago

I was my feecking haikus reinstated

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 15:13:15

I'm a great believer in "we are where we are" and let's move on. I think sometimes you have to engage with your enemy (I use that term loosely in Garry's case as I adore him really). It's the only way that things actually ever change.

SydneyScarborough Fri 08-Jan-10 15:13:26

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 15:14:04

I have a haikus hernia from laughing at my Haiku for Garry thread. I can't believe it's gone.

SkipToMyLou Fri 08-Jan-10 15:16:54

Your current idea, Beta, much like your original one, leaves me with about as much enthusiasm as going out and digging my car out of the snow with a teaspoon.

You're the adman, I'm sure you don't need a bunch of mere Women to think for you?


BecauseImGarry Fri 08-Jan-10 15:17:22

smile[smil e]smilesmilesmile

Just about sums yesterday up.

BecauseImGarry Fri 08-Jan-10 15:18:15


There's that rogue space again, messing up my pictorial haiku!

(In a homage to Swedes)

GrimmaTheNome Fri 08-Jan-10 15:18:23

I can't believe the Haiku thread was pulled - I was reading it before lunch and it was funny. If one or two particular pieces overstepped the mark, couldn't they have been deleted rather than obliterating the whole thing?

AitchTwoOhOneOh Fri 08-Jan-10 15:19:38

i have some sympathy, swedes, and i would seriously consider it for a 'sexist advertising damages young girls' line but it wouldn't get through the process and he's only talking about a line in a site that will cease to exist the minute the OAA stop paying Beta to prop it up.

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 15:21:28

If we ask for absoute editorial control over the wording. Inclduing punctuation. grin Then what could go wrong?

You can't go through life thinking every man is going to roger you from behind when you turn your back. And wouldn't they look rather silly if they failed to deliver?

It's not about letting people off for the that last poster, it's about letting bygones be bygones and seizing the opportunity to say something important. Interesting even. Something that might just make a difference.

SydneyScarborough Fri 08-Jan-10 15:22:02

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SydneyScarborough Fri 08-Jan-10 15:23:48

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

WilfSell Fri 08-Jan-10 15:25:24

I'm hoping Sharon might appreciate my working practices suggestion



Which no other fucker appreciates.


Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 15:26:55

I am going to repeat my Haiku for posterity

Bearded Mumsnetters
Depilashun isn't working
Hairy Harridans

BecauseImGarry Fri 08-Jan-10 15:27:18

I nodded with approval, Wilf. Sorry you didn't see that.

AitchTwoOhOneOh Fri 08-Jan-10 15:28:47

lolololollolololololol swedes. vg.

i too silently enjoyed your suggestion, wilf. much good it will do shazza, with gazza as a bozza.

edam Fri 08-Jan-10 15:29:34

Go on then Swedes, what would you like the posters to say?

edam Fri 08-Jan-10 15:30:29

(Actually we could get them to do a poster about the reform of the libel laws campaign, couldn't we? That would be rather apt.)

SnowWorm Fri 08-Jan-10 15:30:42

Swedes you are basing a lot on the magical ability of MNers to say something so remarkable that it couldn't be achieved without them. We are just punters on a website, and they will take a slogan from us only if it is one that it suits them to use. The only thing we actually contribute is the branding 'MN' to the slogan.

This is just an uber-sleazy version of the MN-Daily Mail collaboration. And that was sleazy enough.

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 15:31:05

Well I'd love it say Vote Tory. But I can see that might not be very popular with you hairy soshalists. grin

mrsbaldwin Fri 08-Jan-10 15:31:38

Agree with DomesticSlattern re Beta getting some crisis management advice. Teehee.

Anyone reading fancy leaking on here who they called?

SydneyScarborough Fri 08-Jan-10 15:33:23

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 15:33:54

The problem is that, I assume, they are STILL threatening legal action, and reading every bloody post on the site and then tightening Justine's thumbscrews every time they are hurt

Unless there was some sort of mistake in deleting the haiku thread? hmm

edam Fri 08-Jan-10 15:34:01

aw swedes and I dyed my moustache blonde especially for our last meeting. And covered up my hairy legs with trousers.

BecauseImGarry Fri 08-Jan-10 15:34:30

Now Swedes. You don't really mean that.

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 15:34:48

Don't hide your depression **% suffer in silence and it's a growing problem.


How do men manage a family and a full time career?

SnowWorm Fri 08-Jan-10 15:35:11

It surely isn't for 'us' to decide anyway. This will be down to MNHQ won't it? I hope they say no.

edam Fri 08-Jan-10 15:35:23

OK, how about 'Free speech online - reform the libel laws now'. Boring but am all out of creative juices.

domesticslattern Fri 08-Jan-10 15:37:35

I would go with libel laws one actually.


morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 15:37:36


I lose a LOT of important working hours trying to think up haikus you know

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 15:39:23

THE poster means of one design. I think it's a horrible trait to see bad in everything.

Phwaooahhhrrr. Look at the testicles on that.

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 15:42:46

It could say:

Am I being ureasonable ... to want to be as respected as a man?

dittany Fri 08-Jan-10 15:43:49

They could put up posters saying "sexism damages women and girls" or something along those lines. They don't need Mumsnet to tell them to do that.

If they're sorry for the offence their sexist adverts caused, why aren't they putting up anti-sexism posters to right the wrong?

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 15:44:09

Am I being unreasonable .... to want a family and a career?

GrimmaTheNome Fri 08-Jan-10 15:44:54

Yes, a libel law reform poster would be good, though I wouldn't personally limit it to online.

But giving a deadline of 5pm to decide is pretty daft... obviously that would exclude a lot of career women from even seeing this proposal in time as not everyone can mix MNing and work. hmm

And as if the MN could collectively decide something that quickly anyway!grin

Love the AIBU idea.

In fact, just use Am I Being Unreasonable?

<<types up another invoice for trillions and gets swedes bank details for share of dosh>>

AitchTwoOhOneOh Fri 08-Jan-10 15:45:41

very true, dittany. they don't need our input, they've seen the light now.

SydneyScarborough Fri 08-Jan-10 15:47:38

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 15:49:57

Something on equal pay or positive action to get women into parliament. No time to think of something snappy.

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 15:50:16

AIBU ...


SydneyScarborough Fri 08-Jan-10 15:50:59

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SnowWorm Fri 08-Jan-10 15:52:51

If the words of the slogan are forged in discussion on Mumsnet, and if the B-Team want to use the Mumsnet provenance to publicise the poster, they will need permission from MNHQ.

So MNHQ could you just say whether you would be prepared to get into bed with them <shudder> on this?

SydneyScarborough Fri 08-Jan-10 15:52:51

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 15:54:34

MadameDefarge grin

Aitch - of course they don't need our input. They are going to do a replacement poster anyway. It might be about Tiger Woods or another one about football.

SydneyScarborough Fri 08-Jan-10 15:55:00

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

HerBeatitude Fri 08-Jan-10 15:56:19

What about:

"Sexism is not morally better than racism"

AitchTwoOhOneOh Fri 08-Jan-10 15:57:49

if they've really seen the error of their ways it will be about sexist advertising harming women. and if they haven't, then why are we dealing with them? how many buses? what is the site like? how will the site be funded and for how long?

it's all a load of hokum imo.

dittany Fri 08-Jan-10 15:58:49

My point is that they are being disingenuous. They already know that their ads were offensive. So why don't they just get on with putting anti-sexist slogans on their poster sites to replace the sexist ones. Instead they have to play silly buggers with a deadline and a demand that they can use the Mumsnet brand to help them.

GrimmaTheNome Fri 08-Jan-10 15:58:52

How about Career Women Make Bad Motherf**king Admen Apologise?

Anyway, MPs haiku was seasonal as this seems to be the season for inappropriate weilding of libel lawyers. sad

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 16:00:23

It's a bit like turning down compensation from an employment tribunal because your employer had behaved like a beast.

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 16:01:29

Sexism stinks

Chunkyrice Fri 08-Jan-10 16:02:18

"Yes, it's almost as if they don't realise that the Mumsnet massive rarely agree on anything!"

Am i being churlish to believe that they would think we wouldn't agree on anything in the first place?

Crazycatlady Fri 08-Jan-10 16:02:20

The Britainthinks campaign is only running for two weeks. There is no time to print replacement posters. That's why we've been offered digital only.

We absolutely must not let beta get their hands on the mumsnet logo. Dittany is right, they are being completely disingenuous. It's just wrong.

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 16:02:38

No it's a bit like turning down compensation from an employment tribunal because your employer had behaved like a beast AND IS STILL NOT LETTING YOU WRITE HAIKUS

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 16:02:43

Pay women more - close the inequality gap

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 16:03:19

Single parents make great parents

Rhubarb Fri 08-Jan-10 16:03:32

I take it the pedants have already torn strips off the grammar and punctuation? I do hope so.

dittany Fri 08-Jan-10 16:03:40

I'd vote for Sexism Stinks or Sexist advertising damages girls.

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 16:04:01

Lesbian mums make great mums

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 16:04:42

snort Lenin

HerBeatitude Fri 08-Jan-10 16:05:14

I'm sure they're perfectly capable of dreaming up their own slogans and will do so if we don't take up their offer.

I don't care if they benefit from the MN brand, I think we should suggest an anti-sexist message.

We are bombarded by sexism in the media, it's worse than it's been for years and the worst thing is that everyone denies it's even there. If you notice it, you're characterised as a hairy harridan. Young girls are growing up terrified of being labelled with the F word if they express sentiments which distinguish them from a doormat. It would just be nice, just for once, to have something out there that counteracts that.

Even if it's one slogan on one website/ bus, it will get disproportionate publicity because it will be reported in the press.

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 16:05:18

Women do it 24/7

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 16:07:00

Am I being unreasonable ...... to prefer a bit of girl on girl action in the evenings on Mumsnet?

BecauseImGarry Fri 08-Jan-10 16:07:14

I get the message
that morningpaper is cross
to lose her haikus

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 16:07:20

bearded women welcome

dittany Fri 08-Jan-10 16:07:24

Sexist advertising damages girls sort of fits in with the current Mumsnet campaign against products that sexualises girls.

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 16:07:35

Lesbian mums - BOGOF.

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 16:08:07

<inadvertently snorts water up nose>

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 16:08:57

Sad? Sexist advertising damages girls

HerBeatitude Fri 08-Jan-10 16:09:00

I love Lesbian Mums BOGOF

It's a bit flippant isn't it? And it will cause widespread offence. grin

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 16:09:36

Sad? Sexist advertising damages women and girls

ZephirineDrouhin Fri 08-Jan-10 16:09:48

MP I missed your haiku thread. What did it say (use * and bleeps if necessary)?

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 16:09:56

I don't care if they benefit from the Mumsnet brand so long as Mumsnet benefits from the Mumsnet brand.

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 16:10:25

And this is just in 5mins post school run, come on beta you can do it!

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 16:10:51

With a baby on my lap and typing with one hand.

HerBeatitude Fri 08-Jan-10 16:10:52

Agree Swede

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 16:11:51

Breasts are for feeding.

BecauseImGarry Fri 08-Jan-10 16:14:09
lorelilee Fri 08-Jan-10 16:14:31

For the record - this ad did not offend me in the slightest! Perhaps it's because I'm comfortable in my choice of being a mother who works. Besides, it was obvious it was meant to cause controversy and, dare I say it, ultimately proves that this kind of advertising gets the message across.

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 16:14:35

Equal pay and equal say for women

Chunkyrice Fri 08-Jan-10 16:14:49

I sympathise Swedington. But if they were serious, they would have found another way of doing this, rather than have an open forum to thousands with a meagre time limit.

OrmIrian Fri 08-Jan-10 16:15:02

Was the haiku thread pulled?

<orm stops working and tried to catch up>

AitchTwoOhOneOh Fri 08-Jan-10 16:15:02

hang on.

what is on offer, exactly?

what is a digital ad?

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 16:16:15

they are those things up and down escalators in London that make you think: "Woah! I'm in Bladerunner!"

OrmIrian Fri 08-Jan-10 16:16:55

A digital aid? Isn't that a prosthetic finger?

Crazycatlady Fri 08-Jan-10 16:17:03

A digital ad is just like the banners that run across the top of MN.

ZephirineDrouhin Fri 08-Jan-10 16:17:40

Yes was wondering this about "digital sites". Are we sure this is about the sides of buses?

Love the thrilling 5 o clock deadline gimmick.

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 16:17:57

I still don't know what's on offer precisely. I think it's a replacement poster to replace the bad ass career mother fuckers one. And must be something on their website.

Perhaps we could work in baby-led weaning.

BecauseImGarry Fri 08-Jan-10 16:18:02

How about:

"Mumsnet. This time it's personal"?

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 16:19:42

Is it 5pm today?

Can someone please link me to their offer so I can run my beady eye over the precise terms?

dittany Fri 08-Jan-10 16:19:46

How much would it cost to put up our own poster on a billboard and a couple of buses somewhere to respond to this campaign?

Maybe we could fundraise.

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 16:20:33

here is their offer

WilfSell Fri 08-Jan-10 16:21:14

Oh yeah. I'd go with Dittany's idea. We were gonna start a Mothers4Justine fund anyhow.

Let's do that.

pagwatch Fri 08-Jan-10 16:21:29

surely there must be a suitable

...., for example is a twat

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 16:21:35

oh no sorry here is their offer

(they aren't very good at advertising, poor things)

LeninGrad Fri 08-Jan-10 16:21:47

Women of the world unite, you have nothing to lose except the judgement of others

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 16:23:27

MP - grin You've made me flood my Tena Lady.

Chunkyrice Fri 08-Jan-10 16:23:46

Does anyone know what those up at MN towers make of this?

WilfSell Fri 08-Jan-10 16:24:28

I do hope MNHQ have got Xenia lawyers on standby in case (Beta) infringes our their copyright by NICKING any of this discussion?

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 16:24:56
SorryBeta Fri 08-Jan-10 16:25:16

As some of you have suggested we have a go at a poster - what about 'WILL MUMSNET WIN THE NEXT ELECTION?' We've taken this idea from your homepage so we assume it is 'on brand' for mumsnet. We have been impressed by your power and motivation as a group over the last few days. In this coming election communities like mumsnet will be able to make a big difference. We hope you do. If you like this approach we will have to share it with the OAA for their agreement and legal approval. We'll get back to you a little later to see what you want to do.

SydneyScarborough Fri 08-Jan-10 16:25:37

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 16:25:50
Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 16:26:04

They are probably having tea and cup cakes and looking at what's hot on style and beauty.

HerBeatitude Fri 08-Jan-10 16:27:16

Most of what we've been discussing has been around the subject of sexism, not the general election...

LadyBlaBlah Fri 08-Jan-10 16:27:29

Please no.

It gets Garry off the hook. And makes him look great. Which he isn't.

And bring back the haiku thread - that was genius. And very funny. I mean, how touchy can this man be?

MN doesn't need publicity. He does.

BecauseImGarry Fri 08-Jan-10 16:28:08

PMSL @ will MN win the next election.

I had no idea we were standing.

Mind you, Mothers4Justine could support a bid for her as PM?

BecauseImGarry Fri 08-Jan-10 16:28:40

By the way, has anyone noticed the absence of ABetaDad?

I think we should be told ...

CiderIUpAndSetIFree Fri 08-Jan-10 16:29:33

But (Beta), the 5pm deadline on a corporate branding deal of this nature immediately renders it a dead duck, surely? Or am I just being a bit negative? <bats eyelashes>

panicbuycottonwool Fri 08-Jan-10 16:30:06

what happened to the haiku thread?

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 16:30:41

Mmm delicious McDonald's poster

I really must do some proper work

Crazycatlady Fri 08-Jan-10 16:31:02

No no no no NO angry.

Garry I see what you're trying to do, and I think it stinks.

Right - now for a rational response. Garry, did you see the posts earlier about MN being a meeting place for different opinions? The concept of 'on brand' doesn't really work.

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 16:32:19
dittany Fri 08-Jan-10 16:32:42

Is it just me or are Beta completely MISSING THE POINT.

(Beta) this isn't about Mumsnet, this is about the fact that you put up sexist posters all over the country and you didn't see anything wrong with it.

I'm still supporting "Sexist advertising damages women and girls". Do you like that as a slogan? It'll certainly get people talking. Can you imagine the coverage you'll get in the trade press?

HerBeatitude Fri 08-Jan-10 16:33:20

What does MN Towers make of this?

I just think this is probably a non starter but if it did happen it would HAVE to be something about sexism, not something asinine about mn and the next election.

We got angry because of sexism. The only appropriate way to apologise via a poster, is to deal with that issue, not to go off onto another issue.

Anyway people are sick of the election and it hasn't even started.

Your work is achieving new heights of marvellousness, MP smile

It seems very suspicious to me that we can write a poster for them (and I bet they are wanting us to be grateful to them for condescending to offer us this) but apparently we can't write haikus or limericks about the whole affair!

I was on the haiku thread (I wrote my first ever haiku for it) and didn't see anything libellous or offensive there. It was intelligent humour - though as such, I can understand how some chaps could find it scary.

dittany Fri 08-Jan-10 16:33:47

Obviously legal threats didn't work so they're trying the flattery route now.

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 16:34:25

good cop

bad cop

what to do?!

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 16:35:04
morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 16:36:04
HerBeatitude Fri 08-Jan-10 16:36:27

No they're not missing the point Dittany, they're ignoring the point.

They want to have a poster up which indicates that we've all kissed and made up so Beta redeems itself within its industry and to the wider public, comes across as having accepted a dressing down graciously. Addressing the issue - sexism - won't achieve that for them, which is why they're ignoring it. grin

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 16:37:17

MP you are brilliant

Chunkyrice Fri 08-Jan-10 16:38:36

I agree dittany. Completely missed the point.

If they wanted to do some sort of MN deal it's a separate issue, and they should speak with MNHQ and see how much it would cost them to use MN branding.

The only thing I think they should put up is:

"We were wrong and we are sorry."

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 16:40:08

Oh dear. He just couldn't help jizzing over this thread could he?

AitchTwoOhOneOh Fri 08-Jan-10 16:42:19

precisely, herbeatitude. they want this to be reported as a big fat kiss-and-make-up in campaign. it's such bullshit.

i said on another thread that the much-vaunted 'power of MN' isn't the point. this didn't insult mners, it insulted all working women, parents of working women, children of working women, sahms, EVERYONE. making this about MN allows them to apologise to us as if we're a niche bunch.

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 16:42:59

v true aitch

Harriedandflustered Fri 08-Jan-10 16:43:22

I am with Swedes for accepting this offer

Providing we say something sensible and snazzy

I like it better now that Garry is trying to charm us than when he was threatening us

Although I am not going to write poems on MN any more. They just get deleted. And I invested drink time in those haikus and limericks...

Crazycatlady Fri 08-Jan-10 16:44:57

Agree Aitch, the offense went far above and beyond MNers, and it's the widespread vindication of this (sadly still prolific) viewpoint that was the problem with this campaign. It wasn't because a few MNers got mad... offering a joint campaign to MN isn't the way to repair the damage.

LadyBlaBlah Fri 08-Jan-10 16:45:41

For me, the only poster that would work is

" I am a sexist pig"

And a big picture of you know who

ROFL @Swed

how about

Ad agencies are sexist pigs. Discuss?

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 16:53:05

what about this ad

with the line "This is what I'd like to do to those bad Mumsnetters" ?

Lolol morningpaper!

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 16:56:59

<<post-coital tristesse>>

Harriedandflustered Fri 08-Jan-10 16:58:09

I am one of Garry's 15 spankees


BecauseImGarry Fri 08-Jan-10 16:58:28

Oh look. It's nearly 5 pm ...

LadyBlaBlah Fri 08-Jan-10 16:59:28

Oh well.....tick tock

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 16:59:39

well done Harried! grin

dittany Fri 08-Jan-10 16:59:54

I quite wanted to be taken to libel court for calling someone a tw*t on the internet.

So far "Sexist advertising damages women and girls" has two votes. All the others have one each.

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 17:02:44

Feminist men make the best fathers.

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 17:03:00

Well he'll be here any minute stroking his evil cat

WilfSell Fri 08-Jan-10 17:03:08

I am weeping at those billboards. Took me a moment to get the Portsmouth one though grin

BecauseImGarry Fri 08-Jan-10 17:04:43

Doesn't sexist advertising damage men as well though?

Harriedandflustered Fri 08-Jan-10 17:07:31

Well done MP for the billboards

So what are we doing about the exciting opportunity offered by beta

Mothers prefer beta males?

I like Swedes' one about feminist fathers, and Lenin's too

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 17:07:33
LadyBlaBlah Fri 08-Jan-10 17:07:44

It does certainly damage those men who write them

GrimmaTheNome Fri 08-Jan-10 17:08:37

Quite right Garry.

(tries to think of snappy line and fails... anyway its 17:08)

dittany Fri 08-Jan-10 17:08:43

Not as directly as it damages women and girls. The people who were harmed the most by the (Beta)/OAA were women and girls. And it was a direct attack on mothers who are all women.

It's like saying racism hurts white people. Well maybe it makes us worse people and damages our humanity but it isn't the same as being discriminated against and belittled because of the colour of your skin.

morningpaper Fri 08-Jan-10 17:10:07
Blu Fri 08-Jan-10 17:12:27

Thank you for agreeing to remove the posters.

I too am sceptical that there has been any 'misunderstanding', for all the reasons discussed by other posters, but hopefully there has been a re-think about who your public are and how you to talk TO them as well as about them, and women as earners, budgetters, consumers and mothers will be thought about more carefully.

But in the meantime, it is appreciated that you have removed the posters.

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 17:13:18

Women are catsbumface about sexist advertising. [and then a picture of a cat's bum face]

Swedington Fri 08-Jan-10 17:14:48

Blu - You are always such a nice person. smile

CiderIUpAndSetIFree Fri 08-Jan-10 17:15:05

Oh I LOVE the evilpet!

ElephantsAndMiasmas Fri 08-Jan-10 17:20:07

What Grimma said: "How about Career Women Make Bad Motherf**king Admen Apologise?" Bloody hilarious grin grin grin

Well I like crap puns. So how about "Posters Fight Sexism". Come on, someone find a better pun about posters please i am dense!

Maybe just keep it simple:

"The SCUM Revolution Starts At Dawn"

"Being a Sexist Twatbag is Bad"

WilfSell Fri 08-Jan-10 17:22:37

Actually I LOVE that one too. And then they could just stick big stickers over the end of the existing billboards.

But we're not playing now, so we won't let them have it.