To think Lush have missed the mark with their new marketing campaign?

[HopefullyAnonymous]

Just that really. It seems a very ill thought out campaign, and one which has generated an awful lot of bad feeling. 17,000 one star reviews overnight. Rather than highlight the issue they are supporting, it comes across as an attack on the police as a whole. I think they’ve made a big mistake.

Yanbu the campaign is poorly designed and excuted.
YABU that the Police are all good.
SYP Hillsborough and CSE
WYP see above
Humberside Police lost rape victims statement and covered it up.

What they are talking about is utterly repulsive. Women duped into having sex with, children with, living with, men who were lying to them every day. It is a serious issue. And although the law may not support it, I consider what these men did to be sexual assault. They knew the women would not have sex with them had they known and they went ahead anyway.

However Lush sell bloody bath bombs. Stinky, stinky, migraine-inducing bath bombs. It wasn't their place.

For background - here's info on Mark Kennedy form one of the women he tricked. He - and the police - treated her appallingly IMO.

Lisa, who comes across as warm-hearted and thoughtful, rejects suggestions that she could have unmasked Kennedy earlier or that his deception was no different from those of many other cheating husbands.

The difference, she says, is that his deception was supported by the resources of the state. Undercover officers who infiltrated political groups were issued with fake documents, such as passports, driving licences and bank records that would help to fortify their fabricated alter egos. “I had no chance of seeing through that kind of training and infrastructure.”

Lisa has found it difficult to come to terms with the feeling that she had no free will during her relationship with Kennedy. A “faceless backroom of cops” controlled his movements, deciding when he could go away with her, or which demonstrations they could go on. “I just have this feeling that someone else made all the decisions, and it was not me, and it was not even him.”

Detailed article here

However Lush sell bloody bath bombs. Stinky, stinky, migraine-inducing bath bombs. It wasn't their place.

Lush do activism. It's their thing. Why shouldn't they use their money for campaigning rather than shareholder profit?

I thought that was the point of capitalism, we can all use our money for what we choose, no?

It’s a badly thought out campaign and awful

Makes no sense at all.

user1471450935 every profession has cunts in them. Every one of them. Except not many have a target on their back as the police has right now (Belgium for ex.)
So this adolescent, poorly executed 'campaign' is boycott worthy.
Lush was asinine. Frankly, heads should roll right now.

Lush have done a few misguided campaigns. Because of them I cannot bring myself to shop there. With this one they are a bit late to the party. You cannot call this tripe "activism". It's more "what trendy bandwagon can we jump on now?"

I saw it today from across the street. Glancing/without knowing what it’s about, there’s tape on the window, you just look at it and think it’s anti-police.

(It’s idiotic)

I love Lush products but another that could never shop there.

First their backing of the hunt sabs (thugs) and now this. What are they thinking?

Yes the campaign idea about the corruption of the undercover unit was good.
However they showed a uniformed a cop and said they lie? That's not the message they should have been spreading and that is why there's the deserved backlash and why many will no longer support a soap company that does stupid things

www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/fury-cosmetics-giant-lush-launches-12630982

bombcosmetics.co.uk/sir-fizzalot-blaster-160g

user1471450935 every profession has cunts in them.

This comment is unfair. Firstly, the Spy Cops issue is about police who were acting like cunts because they were doing their job, not because they'd gone rogue. Not only were their superiors aware they were in relationships with women, they were to directing their movements.

Also, many of user1471450935's examples point to systematic abuse of power and corruption, it's not just a few bad apples.

Finally, the police wield massive power over people's lives. They need to be held to a higher standard.

They have a long history of going off half cocked with this kind of thing so it must be a strategy or choice - they are a highly litigious multinational company. Other notable weird stuff includes putting a bound and gagged woman in the window and torturing her to protest animal torture, forcing staff to collect 'kisses' and ignoring abuse of those staff when they complained and a strange over involved transgender rights campaign last year. They seem to feel that they are agitators and activists when in fact they are a retail consortium selling cosmetics and make up - often in un recyclable plastic packaging.

It's a few bad apples. Out of 120k plus officers how many are corrupt?

Also this campaign in the window showed a uniformed cop? How Is that highlighting the failings of the undercover cops?

Lush do activism. It's their thing. Why shouldn't they use their money for campaigning rather than shareholder profit?

Well I don't want to fund campaigns like this. Thankfully I rarely shop at Lush and now I won't be going there at all.

It's a few bad apples. Out of 120k plus officers how many are corrupt?

Firstly, the Spy Cops campaign is NOT about cops being corrupt.

It's about some immoral practices happening as routine for undercover cops, and the inquest into this potentially collapsing.

Secondly, talking about the SEPARATE issue of corruption. sometimes it isn't just one or two bad cops. I hope the Met has sorted their shit out these days, but I grew up in an area where the local police force was caught being involved in all sorts of corruption. The allegations included:

• planting drugs
• threatening to plant drugs
• illegal confiscation of drugs
• supplying drugs
• attempted bribery
• accepting bribes
• theft of personal property

The police station became a (the?) main supplier for the crack being dealt on the road. They were also beating people up, stealing from people they'd arrested, harassing black people, in particular young black men etc.

Once the scandal became pubic, IIRC, local press reported at the time that in this single police station there were allegations against over 90 of them.

In some of the examples given by user1471450935, the coverups that happened required many police over many years to be complicit.

I'm not saying all police are bad!! But to say it's just a few bad apples is dangerous, as we need to be aware that corruption can involve large groups of police, not just "lone wolves".

We don't support the good officers by pretending all police are squeaky clean.

I want to know - what happened in my local police force to make this kind of systemic corruption possible? Are police being properly supported in one of the most stressful jobs? Can whistleblowers report easily? Are enough checks being done to exclude people who join the police for the wrong reasons e.g. a power trip?

And - away from corruption and back to the actual Spy Cops issue - how could a policy that robbed women of their childbearing years of even made them bear children under false pretences by sanctioned by the state? What's in place to look at ethics and how did it fail here? What's changed - if anything?

So they've removed the poster in the window of the Oxford St branch.

There is just a black frame with a plain white panel there - not sure if this is a political statement (the empty frame) or a speedy removal with no other poster to hand.

I've just tried to look at the this campaign but looks like it's been taken down,

However there is a picture of Jeremy Corbyn (WTF), does he shop there?

That's enough to never shop there but I don't anyway. All their products smell weird. They are trying to be 'right on' and getting it wrong.

For so many reasons,worse shop on the high street!

I heard a radio interview with one of the women who had a child by an undercover policeman.

She was raging about this - no one warned her that they were taking her story (she was identifiable so was getting unwanted attention - and her child too presumably) for what is basically a cool and edgy Benneton 1980s style marketing promo.

She was calling on the company to call her and explain why they did this - and said that she thought the campaign was wrong anyway.

I was in Body Shop today and looking forward at the 'sign up to stop animal testing for cosmetics' campaign. I was rattling cans on the street for this in the 1980s and I know the BS had been arguing for this since forever.

Some things never change - but at least a campaign is relating to cosmetics and is in their arena. Not gender wars and the police.

I've refused to go into Lush for a long time now and can't see this changing any time soon. I'd rather bathe with a skunk (and at least I won't end up with glitter up my arse).