Stop Funding Hate: Campaign against media hate rhetoric (Daily Fail, Sun, Daily Express)

[TeamEponine]

Yesterday a campaign was launched called Stop Funding Hate. It aims to tackle the papers that spread fear and hate, and then profit from this. The idea is to persuade advertisers to remove their adverts, and consequently their funding, from these media outlets. Virgin Media is the first being targeted as Richard Branson has been openly critical of the media’s divisive strategies.

Facebook page with more information and a great video that can be shared: www.facebook.com/stopfundinghate

Petition on 38 degrees: you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/virgin-media-pull-your-sun-advertising

The hashtag #stopfundinghate is also being used on Twitter.

I am nothing to do with this campaign, so this isn’t self-promotion. I just feel strongly that the media are irresponsible and that they contribute to the creation of fear and hate in this country. This is the first thing that seems to allow me to do something proactive, so I thought I’d share it.

Apologies if this has been posted elsewhere, but I couldn't find anything! I also wasn't sure where to post it, so I hope this is the right place.

There is a complex debate to be had around balancing free speech with banning hate speech - one being had in microcosm regarding MN moderation right now, in fact. I can see both sides of the argument. But this campaign isn't censorship. If the government were dictating what is and isn't in the papers, well - that's problematic. A consumer campaign which makes it clear there is a significant number of people who are revolted and horrified by the racist coverage in these tabloids is different. It's not banning anything or censoring it. But it's putting pressure on those papers, indirectly, to moderate their rhetoric. They don't have to do it. I won't buy the Mail and I won't click on their links. I'll sign any number of petitions protesting against their offensive coverage e.g. The Enemies of the People because that's exercising my right to free speech - I am free to say the Mail is pushing a bigoted and hateful diatribe and I find it disgusting. People who think that I should shut up about that and StopFundingHate should shut up are surely censoring our opinions? If we are all for freedom of speech then those of us who object to the Mail can do so freely, can express that to companies who advertise there and they can decide which is the better business decision for them. It isn't censorship.

As I said and for the final time - your "hate speech" is my common sense statement and probably vice versa. All media is biased, some are crass and upfront. Some are more subtle and might appear balanced but are just as slanted. Look at how biased the Broadsheets / BBC were towards Hillary Clinton, (I am not a Trump supporter I hasten to ad) but the way they 'Presidentialised' her was quite blatant.

We will see things that we profoundly disagree with in the press now and again.

No to censorship.

Have to agree with the above, anyone that pedals no to any type of speech is officially pro censorhip. Especially with a term like 'hate', because as we all know todays narrative is 'I don't agree with you, therefore you must be spewing hate, and are racist sexist homophobic...'

The first question would be, who gets to regulate what 'hate' is? If you're giving that power to the current government then media will officially start leaning further toward the incumbant party, like we saw the BBC do with the tories last year when fudning was 'being reviewed'.

The last thing you want to do is start legislating who can say, or write what, even if you think it's hate.

The second would be, who does this get attributed to? Is anyone who posts a blog media? when will this be expanded to anyone to types anything online etc...

See where it goes?

It's wrong that a newspaper can print a load of lies on it's front page and only has to make an apology several days later in two lines hidden in the depths of that publication. The apology should be as large [and on the same page] as the lie [imo]. I've been horrified for a long time at the headlines I see in newspapers. One of the few places that didn't vote for brexit was Liverpool where, I believe, no one buys/reads The Sun because of Hillsborough. Which shows what an influence these newspapers have.

One of the few places that didn't vote for brexit was Liverpool where, I believe, no one buys/reads The Sun because of Hillsborough. Which shows what an influence these newspapers have

Liverpool did indeed vote Remain, as did Manchester and a number of other cities. However, the idea that no-one buys or reads the Sun in Liverpool is pure fantasy. The much publicised boycott reduced the Sun's sales significantly but they have recovered somewhat. It remains one of the most read newspapers in Liverpool despite campaigners wanting you to believe otherwise.

Personally I think it is extremely condescending to assume that Sun readers do what the newspaper tells them and are incapable of making up their own minds.

As I said and for the final time - your "hate speech" is my common sense statement and probably vice versa.

I don't think that really works, because of the fact that the likes of the Mail and Sun print outright lies - which no-one could characterise as a common sense statement. I really can't see any objection to censoring lies.

One of the few places that didn't vote for brexit was Liverpool where, I believe, no one buys/reads The Sun because of Hillsborough. Which shows what an influence these newspapers have.
Well done to Liverpool, for their brilliant and ongoing campaign on the sun

I wrote to Tesco to ask them to stop selling these papers.

Got a nice letter back, but no firm commitment to stop selling them, although not a firm refusal.

Replied that I'd boycott Tesco and would be urging other mnetters to join me! I know all the other stores sell them,but Tesco probably shifts the most. And it feels dirty buying food near such racism.

Anyone?

Yes; freedom of speech isn't 'freedom to lie' [imo]. People may have the right to decide if it is a lie that they're reading but it also reinforces racist views in people that are that way inclined and goes towards the 'tyranny of the majority' which seems to be where we're heading [probably already are] now.

Ironic that Stop Funding Hate appears to be a group encouraging people to hate for free.

How about a new slogan - Stop funding hate - put 3000 people out of work.

cdtaylor, why would it put people out of work? All that people ask is that these papers stop printing lies, and stop doing all they can to foster hate. That doesn't have to mean they close down. But if they can't make money without promoting outright bigotry then yes, it is better that they close down: you can't claim that keeping people in employment is more important than stamping out overt racism, disablism, and misogyny.

Part of this is to use a trolley, place all the sun newspapers or DM in the trolley and wheel to an obscure place, nothing wrong with changing your mind.....

LOL at this thread.

If you listen to the alt-right and similar voices in the media, the thread which runs through their discourse is "We are the voices of truth speaking against the liberal consensus."

If you shut down their arguments, it just confirms the narrative and people become even more convinced. "They are trying to shut us down because they know they'll lose the argument if there is a debate."

Don't kid yourself that they won't find other places to talk and to reach people. They will. And those places will then become echo chambers for the same views.

If you disagree with people, then stick to arguing with them.

And the main characteristic of leftists discourse is usually : innocent victims (us) and privileged oppressors (them).

But I completely agree with you, free, open debate and discussion is what is needed. After all f you have confidence in your beliefs and arguments then why would you fear someone else's, or call for them to be suppressed?

No, that really is an inaccurate characteristisation of so-called "leftists' discourse." For very many people on the left wing, perhaps most, the primary concern is not for themselves but for the most vulnerable people within society, notably those who are oppressed because they are poor, disabled, from ethnic minorities, or indeed simply because they are female.

Ok that's the "Us" explained then. I am from ethnic minority as well as female. I dont consider myself 'vulnerable', or ;oppressed', so please don't think that your selfless crusade is on my behalf.... Thanks ... Byeeeee

Here are the core principles of the Stop Funding Hate campaign in case this is of interest:
www.facebook.com/stopfundinghate/posts/328388847498452

Surprised to see so many posters opposing this perfectly reasonable (it seems to me) way of communicating our views to the powerful in the land who are ... big companies - and asking them to act on them. I don't see it as particularly different to writing to your MP asking them to do something about an issue you care about. I feel it is participating in civil society in a way that we are all free to.

If people want to write to BMW asking them to stop advertising in a 'misleading lefty rag' like the Guardian, then go ahead. Personally, I think we have more to fear from this sort of thing (pic).

So I've written to John Lewis letting them know I'd like them to withdraw their advertising and that I will support them if they do. Hardly censorship is it? What they do is entirely up to them.

www.ibtimes.co.uk/john-lewis-under-pressure-partners-back-stop-funding-hate-campaign-1593586?utm_source=social&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=/john-lewis-under-pressure-partners-back-stop-funding-hate-campaign-1593586
Pressure rising to stop sale of these things in Lewises

BTW
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/eu_referendum_2016_/2785936-Westministenders-Boris-has-lost-it-Time-for-that-emergency-budge-er-tax-giveaway?pg=29
morningrunner on this thread successfully lobbied companies not to advertise on Breitbart website.

I'd have been all for this campaign as a young woman. I'm a grown up now and think it's pathetically simplistic and silly now. Well intended I'm sure, but vacuous nonsense.

"A television producer I know once joked that she was considering pitching a reality show to the networks to be called Daily Mail Hate Island. The conceit was that a group of ordinary Britons would be marooned on a desert island where the only news they’d have of the outside world would come in the form of the Daily Mail; viewers would find themselves riveted by watching these benighted folk descend into the barbarism of bigotry as they absorbed ever more factitious twaddle. But as I pointed out to this media innovator, we’re already marooned on Daily Mail Hate Island: it’s called Britain." Will Self New Statesman 28.11.16

With the election of the Mersey sider Nuttall as the new leader of UKIP, with his negative views on keeping the NHS and desire to re introduce death penalty ( by referendum) this campaign is even more important.
Liverpudlians have stuck with the boycott of The Sun so brilliantly for decades, it's even more important that the 'stop funding hate' campaign continues to grow in strength.

"Liverpudlians have stuck with the boycott of The Sun so brilliantly for decades, it's even more important that the 'stop funding hate' campaign continues to grow in strength." ??? I'm pretty sure they read other tabloid newspapers instead. Liverpool's stance on the Sun was about one particular issue vis a vis one particular paper.

The only organizations which are likely to cave to these sorts of demands are going to be organizations like John Lewis, which are mainly used by middle-class and upper-middle-class people.

A big part of the narrative of the "radical right/immigration-skeptical voices" in recent years is "We are the authentic voice of working-class people; the left-wing media is controlled by posh elitist people who think they are better than us."

Having posh brands withdraw en masse from any "immigration-skeptical" media outlets will absolutely reinforce this kind of feeling, and feed the narrative.

The irony of this campaign seems to be lost on many.
You will stop swearing whether you fucking like it or not!

Who is going to police this, and how will they decide which newspapers they are going to try and shut down? Will it just be papers they dont like, or will it be all newspapers that anyone claims prints a lie. Its just a baying mob trying to end free speech, sounds very similar to what Donald trump is saying in America. Scary.

Supper mummy: The campaign has nothing to do with closing down newspapers!
It is all about advertising....

Lico: And what happens if you manage to stop anyone from advertising in a newspaper or stop shops from selling them? It can't afford to operate and is shut down.

So the direct consequence of this campaign, if it were successful, would be to end free speech.