Comedy event cancelled at the Fringe because of Glinner?

[Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g]

I hadn't seen anything about this on X/Twitter previously, but apparently some activists have been putting pressure on the venue and they've cancelled an upcoming event called Comedy Unleashed because one of the comedians is Graham Linehan. How utterly pathetic. https://twitter.com/UnleashedComedy/status/1691476377793409024?s=20 Seems to be organised by/associated with Andrew Doyle, aka Titania McGrath.

Who here specifically said that no matter what was the nature of the expression of a protected belief, a discrimination claim would be upheld by the courts?

As I understand it I dont think they will claim it has anything to do with protected beliefs.

I think they will argue on reputational damage and that because Glinner was a surprise unnamed guest, they weren't aware he would be there.

They will argue that given their customer base and providing a welcoming environment to that customer base they would damage their reputation by having someone who their customer based has what they consider hostile (hate) opinions.

So its a bit like the US museum. ie if Glinner had never been named, had turned up, not been introduced, made the audience laugh, then maybe the venue would be able to say that his humour (like JKR's stories) could be appreciated so long as his name was not attached to it!

Of course a contract exists. You have no idea what the terms of it are. It’s really common for venue hire contracts to include clauses allowing the venue to cancel in specific circumstances, which often include events bringing the venue into disrepute etc. I don’t know if the contract included such a clause, but neither do you. That’s the point.

allowing the venue to cancel in specific circumstances, which often include events bringing the venue into disrepute etc. I don’t know if the contract included such a clause

Quite often those types of clauses don't actually stand up in court where there is a breach of law.

I don't believe terms of a contract can be enforced that would unreasonably breach, ooh as a completely random example, the Equality Act. Say, it said 'we reserve the right to cancel, without notice, an event if one of the members were pregnant'. That's a rather facile example but it'll serve.

Also, could Glinner, or rather the company employing him, really be legally cancelled for something he might say?

A lot of rental contracts specify "clauses" that aren't legally enforceable, for example, because legal protections for the renters override them, and you can't sign them away.

I think you'll find their first statement is damning PlanetJanette, they walked it back in the second statement and are trying to walk it back even further no doubt due to advice from their Lawyers.

What has that got to do with Graham Linehan's booking at the Leith Arches being cancelled?

I repeat

Who here specifically said that no matter what was the nature of the expression of a protected belief, a discrimination claim would definitely be upheld by the courts?

Could you please quote the exact post which claimed this, @PlanetJanette or I guess everyone will see it's just your ridiculous straw man.

No one has said that Forstater means that Gender Critical beliefs cannot be expressed at all.

Yes, plenty of TRAs have done elsewhere.

That’s really not common in a venue for hire contract 😂 plus, Comedy Unleashed are expressly known for their non-censorial position. Leith Arches should never have signed a contract with CU if ‘reputational damage’ was a real concern.

As an aside, In terms of ‘reputational damage’ - well, Leith Arches seem to have done that to themselves.

They haven’t posted on FB about the Linehan debacle (very wise, seeing as their is almost definitely legal action pending) but there are 160
comments expressing disapproval at GL’s cancellation on an unrelated post.

Streisand Effect again.

LA wouldn’t have gotten nearly this much reputational damage if they had just allowed the show to go ahead.

https://www.facebook.com/100063715086825/posts/762865919180571/?mibextid=rS40aB7S9Ucbxw6v

Well quite. Linehan hasn't said anything yet at the Leith Arches.

But the Minister of Pre-Crime is on it.

A new Edinburgh venue has been found for the Fringe stand-up show that was cancelled because comic Graham Linehan was set to perform at it.

Comedy Unleashed, which described the show as “edgy comedy”, would not reveal the name of the venue but said ticket holders will find out on Thursday at 3.30pm.

https://news.stv.tv/east-central/graham-linehans-cancelled-leith-arches-show-finds-new-edinburgh-fringe-venue

Hepwo posted exactly that upthread. Go find the post yourself if you’re interested.

But if, after all that, we’re agreed that a service provider can lawfully discriminate against some expressions of a protected belief, the next question becomes whether the sort of expression that might legitimately result in discrimination might include:

• saying ‘nearly all central trans figures’ are paedophiles;
• posting photos of children in states of undress online;
• Expressly (and falsely) calling a number of specific individuals paedophiles and groomers.

Exactly! It amazes me that people don’t realise that notwithstanding what a company has in its own terms and conditions, if they aren't legal they won’t hold up in court.

If those are the reasons that Leith Arches cancelled Comedy Unleashed’s contract then I cannot WAIT for them to try and prove it in court.

Could be funnier than Stonewall’s Emotional Support Animal.

Combing through the track records of the old sexologists eg John
Money should be interesting too - has the potential to be even more revelatory than Mermaids V Charity Commission.

And that didn’t work out well for Dr J Breslow and Big Soose.

…but if they are legal they will.

Which is why blanket statements about breach of contract are wide of the mark.

That sort of clause will be enforceable if they don’t contravene other law - in this case the Equality Act - and I’ve already set out why I think the confident predictions of a successful legal challenge are massively over reading the law.

Blimey, this reminds me of Felix with his constant refrain of “But we just don’t know!”

Can you find an example of a venue for hire contract that has the sort of potential for reputational damage = cancellation without warning clause you imagine?

Because I’m keen to find actual
examples of when anything like that has been upheld by a court.

Yeah, who’d have thunk that it’s a fools game to start predicting legal outcomes with certainty.

"As I understand it I dont think they will claim it has anything to do with protected beliefs."

Glinner has threatened and harassed women and LGBT people on social media. This would certainly not come under so-called "protected beliefs".

Apologies if this has already been posted but here’s a link to a poll on whether Glinner should have been cancelled.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/23726591.graham-linehan-comedians-fringe-show-cancelled/?ref=socialflow&fbclid=IwAR1QkeAKZ6mfk6smTfY5UtEiBNcjq3LKHqcDccy72rDA2WlbTCRyQUiJm64

Hepwo posted exactly that upthread. Go find the post yourself if you’re interested.

No she didn't! It's not surprising you won't quote it, really.

This is a discussion forum, obviously we are speculating, but we do try and do that based on actual evidence & past cases.

Hence I would love to see a sample of the sort of contract you envisage?

93% saying No, the show shouldn't have been cancelled.