Remember the I Heart JKR Poster (Edinburgh) that got loads of complaints...

[SaltandVinegarSquares]

According to Network Rail they "received complaints" (plural) about the poster, and one complaint specifically stated "rampant transphobia".

Only it turns out, they didn't.

Not a single fucking one.

Liars.

158 complaints about it's removal though.

OldCrone thanks for posting that tweet! Outstanding work. I'll post the images from it here for posterity (of sorts, ha)

And the all-important 4th pic

The point, for me, is that as there were no official complaints they relied on their guidelines to justify the removal of the poster.

And as a commenter on the times articles says:

Check whether Network Rail is aiming to improve its ranking in the "Stonewall Workplace Index"?

They can't be having one rule for political lobby groups like stonewall and a different one for Posie Parker.

Interesting that it was assumed to be a comment on 'trans rights' right from the off.
Does "I support Boris Johnson" imply that you hold his views on 'picaninnies' ?

OldCrone

That's interesting. Presumably that means any political advertising or lobbying falls foul of their guidelines. I wonder if that policy is being applied consistently?

DeaconBoo I only saw that tweet because rogdmum posted a link to it earlier in the thread.

Further here
twitter.com/MaryHowden/status/1304446912616181761

Sorry not to credit @rogdmum - I did click on the tweet but I think I only saw the first one not the whole thread with the rest in it.

And one more when the tweeter followed up

@Datun

The point, for me, is that as there were no official complaints they relied on their guidelines to justify the removal of the poster.

And as a commenter on the times articles says:

Check whether Network Rail is aiming to improve its ranking in the "Stonewall Workplace Index"?

They can't be having one rule for political lobby groups like stonewall and a different one for Posie Parker.

Quite. They are a state run entity. If they are showing partisan favour to specific political lobby groups? They should be held to forensic account.

Basically looks like the cause of the removal was the Times pointing out the activities of the person who placed the ad. Not the content of the ad itself, as NR agree.

twitter.com/zeno001/status/1304459516575178755

Pride colours might be considered as just an expression of support. But I'm pretty certain stonewall advertise themselves as a 'political lobby group'.

So aligning with them isn't neutral in the slightest.

Presumably that means any political advertising or lobbying falls foul of their guidelines. I wonder if that policy is being applied consistently?

Of course it isn't. Remember the 'dear transphobes' posters? See the second post in this thread.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3982970-foi-network-rail-and-stonewall

And they're Stonewall champions, which means they give money to a lobby group to be 'educated' by them.

@OldCrone

Presumably that means any political advertising or lobbying falls foul of their guidelines. I wonder if that policy is being applied consistently?

Of course it isn't. Remember the 'dear transphobes' posters? See the second post in this thread.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3982970-foi-network-rail-and-stonewall

And they're Stonewall champions, which means they give money to a lobby group to be 'educated' by them.

Well colour me unsurprised. Let's hope that the tattered remnants of the fourth estate shine a light on these glaring inconsistencies.

And they're Stonewall champions, which means they give money to a lobby group to be 'educated' by them.

I'm guessing they might have to now put their complaints department on immediate standby.

@Hangingbasketofdoom

Complaints about it being taken down will obviously not be ones saying it was transphobic. So, 158 people (I would assume mostly women) counts for less than zero people complaining about transphobia.

This needs saying again.

Not to mention they’re happy to ruin JKR's reputation (and potentially do damage to her career) over not a single complaint.

people have as much right to complain if they're not in the country seeing as its spread to them too.

I don’t know about it being a ‘right’, anyone can tweet anything to a company if they’re not blocked so they ‘can’ do it... but I would really not be impressed if in my hometown of Palmerston North, something that made sense to the locals was removed because someone in Edinburgh was offended by seeing it on twitter and would never see it in real life.

Twitter shouldn’t dictate what the real world looks like. I don’t like complaints being made through that channel at all.

Twitter - as my dear DS always says - isn’t real life. It’s where people hang out who need to get out into the fresh air a bit more.

I find it a fascinating window into how some people think. People you may be standing next to in the lost office queue... 😒😒😒

Ah, there's another photo of the poster in the Times today, beside a piece on the lack of complaints.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rowling-poster-removed-from-waverley-station-despite-zero-public-complaints-rq29r2jg0?shareToken=6c88acc62e11f677ae37870a79280df7

(The Times also has another excellent column by Janice Turner today, it seems to be one of the less tattered remnants of the 4th estate)

You remember the days when mary whitehouse sympathisers complained to the dailymail about a programme they hadnt watched and had just read about in the newspaper?

That.

But fast forward 30 years.

@Datun

Pride colours might be considered as just an expression of support. But I'm pretty certain stonewall advertise themselves as a 'political lobby group'.

So aligning with them isn't neutral in the slightest.

God no they don't. They'd lose their charity status if they did that.

They ARE a political lobby group, but they don't advertise themselves as being one.

They ARE a political lobby group, but they don't advertise themselves as being one.

There was recently a bit of background digging and someone came up with 'political lobby group' as a self description. I'm pretty sure it was stonewall. I didn't screenshot it tho. But I do remember whoever unearthed it was shocked.

Does that ring any bells with anyone else?

The thing that interests me most about this is the part when someone decided that "I love JK Rowling" was an unacceptably political statement. Who made that decision and why? What's the rationale and criteria? Edinburgh is her home city - she's a local, national and global icon. The station itself takes its name from a novel, written by another famous Edinburgh writer. Network Rail love sponging off the Potter franchise. There's a million reasons why her name would be promoted or up in lights at that location.

@Datun

They ARE a political lobby group, but they don't advertise themselves as being one.

There was recently a bit of background digging and someone came up with 'political lobby group' as a self description. I'm pretty sure it was stonewall. I didn't screenshot it tho. But I do remember whoever unearthed it was shocked.

Does that ring any bells with anyone else?

It doesn't. It would be interesting to see that because the acknowledgement confirms something which is crystal clear. Stonewall are a political lobby group. They advocate for changes in the law. Their brand is prominently displayed by agents of the state. Including the police. This means they are part of the establishment. The inconsistency highlighted by the removal of the JKR poster is striking.