Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Site stuff

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

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Daily Mail - The On Mumsnet This Week Column - part 374, appendix 5

601 replies

JustineMumsnet · 06/09/2009 12:20

Goodday Mumsnetters,
Now I know we said we'd abide by the results of the poll and the poll's not quite due to close yet, so first off we hope you'll forgive us for bringing this matter to an early conclusion.

We've thought about this a bit more (thanks to everyone for their considered input - it's been generally helpful to us though not always fun) and we've decided to ask the DM not to run this column under any circumstances.

We've said all along that we were torn by the column. When push came to shove we thought, on balance, we would prefer though it to exist rather than not, assuming we had editorial control (explanation why later on). But NOT if the majority of Mumsnetters were strongly against it running.

I don't think the poll shows that the majority of MN is actually against it, as it happens - I know there's some debate here - I think it shows 43% are. But I think the whole process has shown that those who are against are very very strongly against whilst those who don't mind the column in one form or another don't feel particularly strongly about it (save perhaps Daftpunk ). The 43% odd would never be happy with the column running and I think that therefore it would cause ongoing acrimony, which is of course not what we're about.

What we are about is making parents' lives easier and we don't exclude DM readers from that. MN is open to all.

However, a weekly column could and has been interpreted as a brand alignment - and it's not really as some have pointed out the right fit for us - which is why we wouldn't have sought it in the first instance.

For anyone who's been upset by/ caught in the crossfire of this debate - MP in particular and indeed, Leah Hardy - I apologise. A Mumsnetter has just written to me to say the following (she agreed that I could quote her here):

"I feel the flames of crises are fuelled by MNHQ's over willingness to collaborate. Offering Mumsnetters an opportunity to help steer, but knowing they all want to go in different directions is always going
to be carnage. They can never be of one voice. That's what makes Mumsnet interesting and wonderful, isn't it?"

I think on reflection this is spot on - we have always tried to be as inclusive as possible here at MNHQ. Our answer to most dilemmas is usually "Let's see what the Mnetters think". But on polarising issues like this one this is perhaps a mistake. It all becomes a bit too Lord of the Fliesish, and innocent folk get caught in the crossfire.

A final thought about the nature of MN and how we go about making it viable. Much bigger beasts than us are trying to work out how they can make their websites work in terms of paying the bills. Many are mooting charging in some way for access. Mumsnet is free and we probably turn down as much advertising as we take. We do our best to operate as ethically and communally as possible but we have costs that are rising as we grow - servers, people, offices etc - and it's a balancing act.

Mumsnet is big and successful in many ways but it does not generate huge amounts of revenue and profit. We don't have and can't afford a big PR machine - it's me!

But we want to do tonnes of things - run campaigns like our miscarriage one that could benefit lots of folk, improve the site with new features, spread the word so more can have access to the good advice available here. To do that we need to get out there a bit and we need to generate some revenue.

Being in the Daily Mail every week was obviously one way of getting out there - but not perhaps, as many of you have argued, the right way.

So we'll ask them to stop and keep you posted.

Have a lovely rest of weekend.

MNHQ

OP posts:
Redworm · 09/09/2009 20:09
Grin
Redworm · 09/09/2009 20:13

(Thank you, ZD. It would be lovely, in another life -- preferably another life in the 1940s, in North London, among wealthy and extremely reflective paralysed intellectuals. (Wish I could have been a less dreadful relationships counsellor though))

madameMacfarge · 09/09/2009 20:15

look wot you did to me!

Redworm · 09/09/2009 20:17

You have been recombined with a cashmere goatee and a beard-hair cardigan.

madameDefarge · 09/09/2009 20:20

clue was in the once in a lifetime name change...

beanieb · 10/09/2009 08:08

what's this weeks column about then?

anyone?

daftpunk · 10/09/2009 08:20

beanieb...what's the latest on this..? is moringpaper deffo doing the column .?

sorry, have been missing in action, not able to keep up..

beanieb · 10/09/2009 08:21

Last I read MP had decided not to do it but I am not keeping up. I know MNHQ were going to ask them (DM) not to do it any more but beyond that I don't know... maybe there isn't a column anymore?

LIZS · 10/09/2009 08:35

If anyone is still interested (!) today's column uses an unattributed op from how not to dress a 10 year old like a slut but no other MN quotes - a much better argued article about appropriate fashion for girls.

beanieb · 10/09/2009 08:43

slightly off topic - just went onto the Daily Mail online (Shoot me!) and this headline looks wrong, probably isn't, but doesn't it look weird!?

Redworm · 10/09/2009 09:20

Does that mean there is a 'this week on MN' column in the DM today, LIZ?

LadyMuck · 10/09/2009 10:16

I think that we'll have to wait for a MNer to "go to a cafe" in order to find out!

daftpunk · 10/09/2009 10:19

thanks beanieb..

since this DM thing started, i haven't heard of a single case of swine flu, and the country is coming out of recession....so all good!

LadyMuck · 10/09/2009 10:27

DP The Times reported today that Gordonstoun school is closed due to swine flu (100 pupils out of school), and they've had to postpone a visit from the Queen. Think that it is still around, just not as fatally as first thought.

daftpunk · 10/09/2009 10:39

oh that's sad LM, but yes, the hysteria surrounding it has died down.

one of my dc has had it....very mild thankfully.

LIZS · 10/09/2009 15:31

sorry been out at work,. Yes there is a column "On mumsnet this week..." in print today and it is written by LH. However the quoted mn post is the starting point not the entire content iyswim.

morningpaper · 10/09/2009 15:35

Yikes really? So the column is continuing under the MN banner. Blimey.

LottaRump · 10/09/2009 15:47

can we not read it online then? Just in print?

morningpaper · 10/09/2009 15:51

It goes something like:

This Week On Mumsnet

This week, one mumsnet.com poster wonders: "My daughter, aged ten, has grown over the summer and I'm depressed at what clothing manufacturers think she should be wearing. I accept that the frills and bows days are behind us, but I don't think a child should be wearing T-shirts with suggestive slogans, crop-tops, hotpants and minis. She's not a pole-dancer!"

Oh, I sympathise! My daughter is only four, so she's deep into her pink phase. And I'm not complaining. She prefers polka dots to hotpants and is happiest in a party dress or her snow white costume. Her favourite thing is her new gray school pinafore, which gave me a lump in my throat. But I was horrified while browsing online for her winter wardrobe to find she was now old enough for swquinned black leggings at Next and a batwing sleeve, off the shoulder sequinned top and Marks and Spencer. Both items would have been right at home Jordan's wardrobe and, to my horror, were designed for girls as young as three.
Many of the posters Mumsnet with duaghters complained about the premature sexualisation of children and the belief that it's ok for pre-adolescents to wear horrendous Bratz shoes with high heels, gaping necklines and backless dresses.
Even my gorgeous 18 year old stepdaughter would reject some of these items for being too tarty, so why on earth are they made in sizes to fit babies?

tvaerialmagpiebin · 10/09/2009 17:01

Have we heard any more from MNHQ about whether they have spoken to the DM about pulling this column?

(Am remembering one of those "Girls' Companion" books from the 1950s describing a 13 year old girl "in a gingham frock, freckles maybe on her nose, pigtails tied in just the right way", as having "just as much fashion sense as any Hollywood starlet..and probably more"........)

WebDude · 10/09/2009 17:45

Out of interest, MP, was that from the web, or did you happen to see a copy and can touch-type ?

I only ask because when I spotted your post a half hour or hour ago, I tried a quick search on the DM site for articles by LH, sorted by date and it showed nothing for today.

Redworm · 10/09/2009 17:55

The Mail aren't putting the Mumsnet column on their website anymore, presumably because of all the spoof comments from Mners that the online version attracted.

tvaerialmagpiebin · 10/09/2009 17:56

Think she was summarising from the almost-proverbial "copy I read in a cafe". I don't think they have put the columns online as there were too many dodgy comments from Mr xesmub and other fictional characters.

tvaerialmagpiebin · 10/09/2009 17:57

Whoops x-post sorry
(but some comments were real, and the funniest thing was that it was so hard to tell!)

Cluckadoodledoo · 10/09/2009 17:59

Sheesh if they are going to steal articles from us the least they can do is allow us a bit of fun in return!