What's with the Labour party adverts on MN?

[NorkyButNice]

I don't know why but it makes me very uncomfortable - it feels a bit like MN ought to be impartial like the BBC when it comes to party politics (even if the people who frequent it are in the majority Labour voters).

I presume they are paying for their ads? Will the Tories and Liberals get the same opportunities?

I don't think anyone ever said that they thought MNHQ would refuse to show Tory advertising.

As the first response to the thread said though, MNHQ (in the form of Justine) has very close links to the Guardian, and could therefore be seen to be pro-Labour. Had the first advert to appear been from the Tories then I'd not have the same questions about "free favours for mates", although I'd still have the same unease about one party's politics being pushed over another's.

I feel sure that Justine's first concern is MN and its continuing health, not the party-political interests of her dh's employer.

I find the insinuation that because her dh does one thing J must necessarily toe the same line rather distasteful tbh.

well, 'distasteful' p'raps a bit strong

'annoying' is better

or 'unsisterly' perhaps.

I imagine that the Graun itself would take ads from the tories as happily as from Labour? Tho' I can't remember seeing party pol ads of any sort there come to think of it.

And another thing (sorry,is teatime).

surely the fact that Labour is advertising here shows that they, at least, are by no means certain of our affections.

If they were they'd keep their (v measly in comp to Tories') election ad spend budget for something which would reach 'motorway man'.

God that motorway man profile is as depressing as depressing can be

I think that advertising here shows that they feel that we are a good bet. No one is a certainty.

It will be interesting to see if the tories judge it worth spending a few quid from their advertising budget here.

I'm just surprised to see any party political advertising on MN.

It's well reported that MN has a "voice" when it comes to the election, and the fact that there are adverts for one party and not the others on the site makes it look like that's who MN is backing.

Yes threads, 'unsisterly' is quite it.

If Labour DO want to reach Motorway Man I believe Nuts and Zoo are a bargain media buy.

Yes, Motorway Man looks like a bleak social profile to have. Glad its taking the catchphrase pressure off of Mumsnet Woman though.

Perhaps Motorway Man and Mumsnet Woman will make in some horrible dogging incident off the M25, and produce the next generation's swingers.

make mate

at 'horrible dogging incident'

In some respects it's always a bit of a shock to see party political advertising, I think. Feels rather personally invasive in some odd way. I know that 'we can't go on like this' billboard campaign took me aback rather, when I first saw it.

It's the season though, that's for sure.

In the early eighties, when I was doing some comparative reading re French/British/US political systems for undergrad degree, all the stuff about political advertising in the US drew a very very sharp contrast with the British and French systems. It is SO depressing that we have now reached the same point in British political culture.

Though that Labour Party ad is actually pretty inoffensive -- a straight message rather than an airbrushed andrex puppy type image.

I think its OK for MN to accept advertising from legitimate political parties, but perhaps they should put a statement underneath each one clarifying that this is a paid-for advertisment and that MN has no political affiliation?

Our policy as it stands is to accept political advertising, although obviously not all political advertising. I did stop and think about whether we took this one but on balance thought that Mumsnetters would want to hear what the major parties political messages were on relevant subjects. (We'd obviously accept advertising from the Tories/Libdems at exactly the same ad rate as this one).

Of course if people have major objections we're happy to reconsider this policy - we've always had a rather fluid advertising policy that took account of how you feel about things.

I do find, as an aside, the suggestion that MNHQ's position is somehow determined by my dh and that we must have a left-wing bias because he works for the Guardian a teensy-weensy bit insulting of our (and your) intelligence. The Daily Mail implied the same thing a while back and it all felt a bit 1950s if I'm honest - silly woman hasn't got a mind of her own kind of thing. I do wonder if the same inference would be made were the tables reversed...

Anyway no hard feelings Norky - it's a fair point you've raised about political advertising generally and if it makes folk uncomfortable then we should think carefully about whether it's appropriate so very happy to have the debate. Please do let us know your thoughts.

haven't seen them yet but fully support mn's 'as and when and on individual merits' position on advertising, they've not made the wrong call yet. plus the 'if they're paying...' one.

it's not the blimmin' bbc, they can come down on one party's side if they want, much like rupert murdoch and the sun. that they choose not to is to their credit.

LG, do any of those sites carry political ads? (I can't be arsed to find out). Is anyone likely to think any of those might have political affiliation and more importantly influence - maybe the register but not Dr Who or NetMums obviously

I've no problem with it. But I really think Justine should put up some of our David Cameron posters for good measure