in thinking 'actually, I don't want my 4 yr old dd to see this pornographic fucking shite?

[onebatmother]

Oh just what I wish my children to see when we go and buy icecreams

It was on the lowest shelf (ground-level) with the other papers. DD (4) and DS (8) were transfixed, as you would expect.

I complained, asked Newsagent Man if he agreed it was was pornographic, and whether he would like his small children to see it. Newsagent man shrugged "yes, and no. But it's a paper..."
Me: "So someone makes you put it there?"
Him: "No but."
Me: "You are responsible for where things are displayed in this shop. You put it out of sight of children. Until then, I won't buy anything from this shop. I will be spreading the word."

Really, I was very, very angry.

I complained in our Co-op the other day.
Got told that they have no choice in the display - head office tell them.

Have been meaning to write to them for ages. What the hell is the Co-op doing insisting on porn at childrens' eye level???

It's just common sense to put it up higher... unfortunately common sense doesn't always prevail.
Am at the Co-op though.

Adair - I used to wonder about that big sign on his window too - all I saw as I whizzed past on the 393 was a big sign saying 'PORN' - rather self-defeating

I've joined the fb campaign page and am well up for action Fridays. Thanks, onebat.

Maybe they have to be low down so that the knuckle dragging morons who want to jerk off over it can actually find them...

It's all about the money..any head office will only be doing it because they are paid to by the publisher..shelf position, number of face outs per shelf, all precisely worked out. And making a profit for their business is their number one priority, which you can't blame them for. I hate to say it but turning mags around only makes more work for the poor shop staff, and they don't have a say over any of this really.

It doesn't make it right though and I whole heartedly agree with you that they shouldn't be displayed at childrens' eye level.

I'm forever complaining in my local Tesco and Asda. Asda now have them displayed, well, hidden, behind a green metal thingy. You can't see any pictures only the title and they are on the top shelf, they are used in a lot of Asdas apparently. The have the names of the magazines printed on the metal cover too. Tesco just shrug.

I used to work for Esso garage and I didnt give a stuff what the pretty little diagrams said. I put porn where it belonged, and yes I mean those 'newspapers' rather than the mags with the opaque coverings.

That excuse is ridiculous.

It's not ridiculous, it's a fact! (and I'm really not making excuses, I have no reason to). Clearly not everyone sticks to your diagram rules or there wouldn't be a problem.

Sorry for radio silence - am in emergency dental hospital with ds .. Reading now. Mangoandlime that's interesting - implies that there could be a chance to change things by going to the top, at least with the big chains. With independents, only way wld be local action. But still amazed that there appears to be no equiv of obscene publ act for images on public display. You know, all that 'likely to offend' stuff. Sorry am on iPhone..

This lady has been campaigning for a long time in her local area about this

something similar to this was in my local Somerfield (owned by the Co-Op) a week or more before that issue. The one I saw had some 'babe' reaching down to do up her shoe.

On the page I linked to (other one might not be online, I'm not trying to locate it, but you need a shot that is reasonably close to what was displayed) the young lady has her legs tightly together, but on that particular day in question, the young lady was snapped with her feet about a foot apart. Very shiny green undies but leaving hardly anything to the imagination. Clearly she shaved/waxed.

Apart from the rubbish "paper" (which is on a higher shelf in the nearby Lidl, when they have it at all) the Somerfield also carries Nuts, etc. One I had not noticed before was called 'Front'.

Not sure who, but one day, someone had put sheets of balnk paper across the magazines so only the title were visible.

I've been meaning to make a fuss to the Co-Op, given their past 'ethical' stance, and indicate just why I have no wish to have a loyalty card if they are willing to display 'filth' at child's eye level.

Asda are only a touch better - they have some cardboard shelving which means the "lads mag" covers cannot be seen.

I have joined the facebook group.

Could you boycott these shops?

Not sure how realistic that is for you.

I know our local Sainsburys has plastic shields in front of Nuts / FHM etc so you cannot see the front pages, and they are also at adult eye level, so in theory out of eyesight of little ones in push chairs etc.

If enough people stopped shopping in them then maybe the owners wouuld listen? Certainly of the independent stores such as Martins. Not so easy for Supermarkets like Asda as they are dictated to by head office and get told by the publishers where they want their titles on the shelves.

Wonder if there is a way of making this a bigger politicial issue and getting some backing to make it a public campaign?

onebatmother - thanks for second link...

if you have a way to contact the FB page onwer, might be an idea to suggest they fix the link (it has www.thefrontpagecampaign.or as far as I can tell, and after trying .org, I did try .org.uk but first time even that gave me an error - probably my connection).

I get really annoyed that my lesbian lifestyle magazine - diva is always put on the top shelf.

Not porn at all but they seem to think so.

bigbadmummy, i'd question whether supermarkets get told by publishers where to put stuff, the supermarkets flog prime sites at top dollar to the publishers. I'd agree that supermarkets must vary in how much discretion they give to local branches on these things.

ImSoNotTelling "put it on a different shelf"

Nice idea but the highest shelf in local Somerfield (as it is a freestanding rack thing on the way to the fresh produce) is below 4 foot - I think they have three ros of mags and a few flat along the bottom, so many LOs can see all three shelves of front covers anyway.

The shelving for the newspapers right in front of the tobacco/booze/lottery 'kiosk' only have two rows of papers so they are all very low down.

princessparty - "I wouldn't call it pornography- she isn't naked- she's wearing a g string"

Crumbs - it might be hardcore pornography and they seem to ensure nipples are covered on front pages, but it is far from modest behaviour.

I'd be a hypocrite if I said I don't like to see a sexy bottom or the curve of some boobs (though massive boobs do nothing for me), but these go too far, both the trashy "news" papers and the "lads mags" - they're at least comparable to Escort or Razzle as far as what's on the cover (indeed I think they go further than some of those magazine covers) yet don't get banished to shelves more suitable for adult material.

I dare say there are still plenty of scantily clad women in mags about cars but from what I've seen online (eg MaxPower.co.uk) the "babes" sections still don't allow show of nipples, while the old Sun "page 3" girls certainly did and www.page3.com still does (just went and checked).

of course that last should read "might not be hardcore"

Actually, given they have just covered the damn Digital Economy Bill (now Act) it might be that as a campaigning organisation with no political links, 38degrees.org.uk might be a place to start.

I had been thinking that I could consider some wbesite called "www.shelves-of-shame.info" but I was (on a different project) hoping to get newsagents to assist me, so I'd be shooting myself in both feet if it ended up listing practically every newsagent in the country!

38Degrees accepts ideas for campaigns. They had 20,000 individuals support them on the run up to the Digital Economy Bill and quite a number donated so they could put some adverts in the newspapers about the bill being rushed through. (Not getting any daily papers, I don't know what was actually in the copy, sorry).

It strikes me that if a number of the big chains were bombarded by a few thousand e-mails in a few weeks time (enough time for people to widen knowledge via FaceBook, Twitter, on blogs, and so on) then if it was co-ordinated by 38degrees, it would allow for people here on MN to spread the word, and those on NM too, to mention it, without it being a campaign by "competing" websites.

Of course it might get wider support (on MN) if MNHQ made an issue of it, but 38degrees could probably do the technical stuff about gathering suitable e-mail addresses amd knowing which methods would (a) get the information spread to most sites, and (b) get the maximum embarrassment for the big names like the Co-Op, Tesco, Asda, Morrisons (?) Waitrose (?) and M+S plus the petrol station owners like BP etc (sorry, don't drive, don't even know all the big names... does Q8 still operate?)

It would be something if the multitude of stores all stopped selling the likes of Nuts because they had several hundred thousand e-mails complaining about their policy of carrying unsuitable magazines and trashy newspaper.

If they knew that they would lose even 10% of their food and electrical sales as a result of some junk magazines, I suspect they'd be shouting from the rooftops that they "no longer stock the following magazines: ....."

It might shock the MPs, too, that "people power" (co-ordinated via the internet) means they should look out if they come up with something that gets the public angry...

It's clearly short of civil disobedience, there'd be no arrests or demos needed, but it would need a bit of work on wording which chains are the target, what magazines and "news"papers they stock, and how their action is considered offensive/wrong.

Any volunteers?

shame about the co op I thought better of them
what I want to know is when is someone from Marks and Spencer going to come on here and explain themselves?

I know this is not something to laugh at but I can't help hearing "this is not just porn, this is M&S porn" in my head.