Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

MNHQ

Should Mumsnet be going to Baby Show ? We need your views

207 replies

carriemumsnet · 02/10/2008 14:22

Hi all

Reposting this here from the Baby Show volunteers thread to make sure we get widest response....

Basically we've had a great response to our appeal for help running a stall at the Baby Show. But now something has come up and, as usual, we want you to contribute to our decision. We've had an email from a mumsnetter saying that Clarion, the Baby Show organisers, also organise arms fairs and questioning whether, in that case, Mumsnet should be associated with them.

I don't think any of us are pro arms, but you could argue that Clarion aren't manufacturing or selling arms, they're just the organisers of a fair.

If we attend the Baby Show we have the chance to introduce Mumsnet (a good thing we hope you'll agree ) to several thousand mums-to-be who will then find out, for example, why lots of Mumsnetters boycott Nestle as well as the truth about fruit shoots and Greggs sausage rolls.

Or we pull out now. It's another one of those 'where do you draw the line?' discussions and we're torn. What do you think?

MNHQ

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
SimpleAsABC · 14/10/2008 11:35

what's wrong with greggs sausage rolls?

dittany · 13/10/2008 12:37

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

nickytwoooohtimes · 13/10/2008 12:27

Well, as me old Mum used to say "If you're not sure, don't do it." A sentiment which has served me well with regards to housework anyway.

MNHQ
JustineMumsnet · 13/10/2008 12:26

Hello all,
Sorry for delay in getting back on this, it's been a busy few days.

Well we've cogitated, ruminated and whatever else that annoying Canadian bloke does, and we've decided not to go.

In truth we are still a bit in two minds about this - as it seems the Mumsnet community is - but we feel we need to do a bit more research/ thinking on it and generally think that it's best to err on the side of caution.

Obviously we think nasty weapons sales to evil regimes is bad - that's an easy one. Whether Clarion (the events organiser) and by extension the Baby Show should be held responsible for organising a legal event however is slightly more tricky in our minds at least. And something we'd like to think about a little more before we start banging a campaign drum about it.

Thanks to all for your input - please do continue to add your thoughts/perspective as it's very helpful for us and sorry to all those who offered to represent us at the Baby Show and who will be disappointed not to go there. We appreciate the offer of your time and hopefully they'll be other events.

Best,
MNHQ

vonsudenfed · 10/10/2008 23:08

Sooo, babyshow very soon, but nothing on here.

Does this mean they are going, or that they aren't?

Swedes · 08/10/2008 16:44

Wasn't it the Dalai Lama who said: If you think you are too small to have an impact, try sharing a room with a mosquito.

Bubbaluv · 07/10/2008 12:21

It could make a difference actually...
If they advertise the Baby Show on this site and people here create posts pointing out The Baby Show/Clarion's involvement with Arms shows, then you can bet Clarion's PR dept will pick up on it.

MrsThierryHenry · 06/10/2008 22:40

If you look hard enough you'll find everyone is connected to something or someone dodgy. I have an infinitessimally small, tenuous connection to the Clintons. Which means I'm also linked to Dubya. Yeah, exactly. Couldn't get any dodgier.

Go ahead and do it. You have my blessing.

zippitippitoes · 06/10/2008 22:35

well presumably they will be advertising the baby show oin eht e site lol

fourlittlefeet · 06/10/2008 22:33

I think you should go. The positive impact you have on many lucky mothers, fathers, and babies lives will be far greater and more positive than any 'negative' action.

Jux · 06/10/2008 22:27

Perhaps they'll be advertising arms fairs on the site?

Agree, makes no difference whether money changes hands or advertising, really.

theSuburbanDryad · 06/10/2008 22:12

Cod

Is that strictly necessary, dear?

WeirdCod · 06/10/2008 22:10

Message withdrawn

WeirdCod · 06/10/2008 22:10

Message withdrawn

WeirdCod · 06/10/2008 22:10

Message withdrawn

WeirdCod · 06/10/2008 22:10

Message withdrawn

WeirdCod · 06/10/2008 22:10

Message withdrawn

WeirdCod · 06/10/2008 22:10

Message withdrawn

Swedes · 06/10/2008 22:07

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

vonsudenfed · 06/10/2008 22:05

Jux- I too am v confused about the reciprocal advertising thing too. Perhaps we'll all be invited to the arms fair next time round?

But I'm not sure that the lack of payment makes any difference at all. Just because you're swapping a gun for ducks, doesn't mean you're not paying for it, or the deal is any more or less moral. I think this is a bit of a red herring.

And arfishy - yes, I try to. Our money is in the Co-op (such as we have), I don't shop at Asda (or Lidl) because of their labour relations. I can't afford to be perfect - esp where clothes are concerned - but I do try and think about the impact of where I spend my money. It's almost the only means of expression left to me these days.

SwedeLantern · 06/10/2008 18:41

Running an ad for a Post Office credit card (at 16.9% APR) on this thread and giving sticky status to a thread requesting information (for the Press Association) re credit crunch spending creates an interesting juxtaposition.

Jux · 06/10/2008 16:42

So if you go, you'll be advertising Clarion on the site?

zippitippitoes · 06/10/2008 09:41

obviously they will be supporting clarion bu advertising for them lol

if this thread is anything to go by then the issue doesnt seem to be one that concerns mumsnetters

which does surprise me

Bubbaluv · 06/10/2008 09:32

If no or little cash will change hands then you won't be directly supporting Clarion, so I think you should go. No point all of us sitting behind our computers feeling smug and morally superior - that's not what MN is for, although some people do make you wonder! Provide a tent for disabled babychanging if the venue won't.

arfishy · 06/10/2008 08:12

When I first read this thread I thought - of course they should be there. Mumsnet is for mums and what better place to find them?

I went to the baby fair when I was pg in 2002 and picked up some good advice on reusable nappies and got special fair prices on a number of things that I genuinely needed - it's not all about pram huns (although I did get sucked into a £150 leather Baby Bjorn carrier ). Having said that the Earls court venue is rubbish for mums with buggies (unless this has changed recently) - there is no buggy access and they had hordes of buggy carrying lackeys to get the buggies up the stairs and they certainly should make the effort to have disabled access.

Then I read the views about the links with arms fairs - typical of mumsnetters and what makes mumsnet a better place than bounty et al. A very good point.

However, I think that we all deal with companies affiliated with arms/animal testing/humans rights abuse on a very regular basis. Do we all have savings in accounts knowing that they aren't going to be used to invest in companies that we don't approve of? Did you know that labour had £12 million in funding from defence contrators?

Do we all still shop at Gap despite their child labour issues? At Asda despite Walmart's employment rights issues? Eat KitKats? Vote Labour?

I think maybe telling MHHQ not to go is taking the moral high ground too far, especially if they are unable to get their message of 'why' across in the media.