Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Unflip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Unflip

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Original poster

Remember the I Heart JKR Poster (Edinburgh) that got loads of complaints...

170 replies

SaltandVinegarSquares · 11/09/2020 12:47

According to Network Rail they "received complaints" (plural) about the poster, and one complaint specifically stated "rampant transphobia".

Only it turns out, they didn't.

Not a single fucking one.

Liars.

158 complaints about it's removal though.

Remember the I Heart JKR Poster (Edinburgh) that got loads of complaints...

OP posts:

Thread gallery

ErrolTheDragon · 12/09/2020 09:38

(The Times also has another excellent column by Janice Turner today, it seems to be one of the less tattered remnants of the 4th estate)

ErrolTheDragon · 12/09/2020 09:35

Ah, there's another photo of the poster in the Times today, beside a piece on the lack of complaints.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rowling-poster-removed-from-waverley-station-despite-zero-public-complaints-rq29r2jg0?shareToken=6c88acc62e11f677ae37870a79280df7

SerenityNowwwww · 12/09/2020 09:29

Twitter - as my dear DS always says - isn’t real life. It’s where people hang out who need to get out into the fresh air a bit more.

I find it a fascinating window into how some people think. People you may be standing next to in the lost office queue... 😒😒😒

MillyMollyFarmer · 12/09/2020 09:20

people have as much right to complain if they're not in the country seeing as its spread to them too.

I don’t know about it being a ‘right’, anyone can tweet anything to a company if they’re not blocked so they ‘can’ do it... but I would really not be impressed if in my hometown of Palmerston North, something that made sense to the locals was removed because someone in Edinburgh was offended by seeing it on twitter and would never see it in real life.

Twitter shouldn’t dictate what the real world looks like. I don’t like complaints being made through that channel at all.

ThunderSkies · 12/09/2020 09:11

@Hangingbasketofdoom

Complaints about it being taken down will obviously not be ones saying it was transphobic. So, 158 people (I would assume mostly women) counts for less than zero people complaining about transphobia.

This needs saying again.

Not to mention they’re happy to ruin JKR's reputation (and potentially do damage to her career) over not a single complaint.

Datun · 12/09/2020 00:56

And they're Stonewall champions, which means they give money to a lobby group to be 'educated' by them.

I'm guessing they might have to now put their complaints department on immediate standby.

BovaryX · 12/09/2020 00:55

@OldCrone

Presumably that means any political advertising or lobbying falls foul of their guidelines. I wonder if that policy is being applied consistently?

Of course it isn't. Remember the 'dear transphobes' posters? See the second post in this thread.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3982970-foi-network-rail-and-stonewall

And they're Stonewall champions, which means they give money to a lobby group to be 'educated' by them.

Well colour me unsurprised. Let's hope that the tattered remnants of the fourth estate shine a light on these glaring inconsistencies.

OldCrone · 12/09/2020 00:43

Presumably that means any political advertising or lobbying falls foul of their guidelines. I wonder if that policy is being applied consistently?

Of course it isn't. Remember the 'dear transphobes' posters? See the second post in this thread.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3982970-foi-network-rail-and-stonewall

And they're Stonewall champions, which means they give money to a lobby group to be 'educated' by them.

Datun · 12/09/2020 00:41

Pride colours might be considered as just an expression of support. But I'm pretty certain stonewall advertise themselves as a 'political lobby group'.

So aligning with them isn't neutral in the slightest.

DeaconBoo · 12/09/2020 00:40

Basically looks like the cause of the removal was the Times pointing out the activities of the person who placed the ad. Not the content of the ad itself, as NR agree.

twitter.com/zeno001/status/1304459516575178755

BovaryX · 12/09/2020 00:37

@Datun

The point, for me, is that as there were no official complaints they relied on their guidelines to justify the removal of the poster.

And as a commenter on the times articles says:

Check whether Network Rail is aiming to improve its ranking in the "Stonewall Workplace Index"?

They can't be having one rule for political lobby groups like stonewall and a different one for Posie Parker.

Quite. They are a state run entity. If they are showing partisan favour to specific political lobby groups? They should be held to forensic account.

DeaconBoo · 12/09/2020 00:37

And one more when the tweeter followed up

DeaconBoo · 12/09/2020 00:36

Sorry not to credit @rogdmum - I did click on the tweet but I think I only saw the first one not the whole thread with the rest in it.

DeaconBoo · 12/09/2020 00:34

Further here
twitter.com/MaryHowden/status/1304446912616181761

OldCrone · 12/09/2020 00:33

DeaconBoo I only saw that tweet because rogdmum posted a link to it earlier in the thread.

BovaryX · 12/09/2020 00:33

OldCrone

That's interesting. Presumably that means any political advertising or lobbying falls foul of their guidelines. I wonder if that policy is being applied consistently?

DeaconBoo · 12/09/2020 00:32

Interesting that it was assumed to be a comment on 'trans rights' right from the off.
Does "I support Boris Johnson" imply that you hold his views on 'picaninnies' ?

Datun · 12/09/2020 00:32

The point, for me, is that as there were no official complaints they relied on their guidelines to justify the removal of the poster.

And as a commenter on the times articles says:

Check whether Network Rail is aiming to improve its ranking in the "Stonewall Workplace Index"?

They can't be having one rule for political lobby groups like stonewall and a different one for Posie Parker.

DeaconBoo · 12/09/2020 00:30

And the all-important 4th pic

DeaconBoo · 12/09/2020 00:29

OldCrone thanks for posting that tweet! Outstanding work. I'll post the images from it here for posterity (of sorts, ha)

OldCrone · 12/09/2020 00:26

C) The removal of the advert was triggered by Twitter comments

It seems it was taken down after a Times journalist asked for their comments about the poster and whether they had had any complaints. They then took it down because they decided it was in breach of their advertising policy.

Network Rail's emails obtained via FOI here:

twitter.com/zeno001/status/1304407051746062341

DeaconBoo · 12/09/2020 00:25

@Cailleachian

In the response to complaints they refer to Article 5 of the Network Rail Code of Acceptance. Here is a link which summerises the CoA and has a download link to the full details.

www.jcdecaux.co.uk/content-policies#network-rail

In the summary Article 5 is

"Must not be political and call for the support of or attacks a viewpoint, policy or political group"

So being political alone is not sufficient to break the code. Its clearly in support of JKR, but JKR is not a "viewpoint, policy or political group".

If you download the full code however, rather than relying on the summary, Article 5 is actually about obscenity, the relevant article would appear to be Article 9

"[stations] it is of a political nature calling for the support of a particular viewpoint, policy or action or attacking a member or policies of any legislative, central or local government authority;

which makes it even more explicit.

Sorry, I should also have quoted this post.

DeaconBoo · 12/09/2020 00:24

Stumbledin now that is the salient point in the whole issue, and it was questioned in the previous thread when the poster went up/was taken down. I feel the issue has been derailed (ha) by the claim that NR have lied, when their statement on 'political nature' of the poster was far more worthy of discussion.

THAT is the reason they gave for removal. NR have never explicitly attributed it to complaints, tweeted or otherwise, as far as I can see.

BovaryX · 12/09/2020 00:22

@Datun

It's brilliant that weeks and weeks after the event, people are still chatting, talking and dissecting Posie's publicity stunt.

This thread is a prime example of her marketing genius.

Quite so. And the desire to control, silence and dictate is on prominent display. Not a good look.

DeaconBoo · 12/09/2020 00:22

@BovaryX

Bovary, again I think I'm going ot have to stop responding because we talk at cross purposes

We are not talking at cross purposes. You are unable to refute my points. Maybe you should ask yourself why that is a recurrent theme.

I can't tell what your points are, because you label a point about removing a poster due to twitter complaints as points A, C, or E, then tell me when I specifically state 'point B' that I am actually talking about A, C or E!

Unflip

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet Log In

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.