[Travel] Virgin bin The Daily Mail

[Iggle Piggle]

The reason that it is an effective campaign is it goes to the heart of an obvious hypocrisy. Organisations that pay lip service to inclusion and diversity whilst diverting resources to propping up messages of intolerance are being called out on it. It's up to them to decide what to do.

One of the organisations they are after is John Lewis. They hardly pay lip service to these things. I did some work with them a few years ago and they are without doubt the gold standard in how a company should operate. Amongst other things employees have Final Salary pensions, employee bonuses that are worth having, John Lewis hotels that only its members can use at a reduced rate and it certainly wasn't a white male demographic we dealt with. Just because John Lewis advertise bed linen on Page 21 of the mail to a target audience of pensioners with more money than sense seems no reason to boycott them to me. If the Mail overstep the mark, that's a job for the PCC, not sure jumped up, perma offended Twitterati and people who spend too much time on Facebook. That said, the companies annoy me just as much. They are just as likely to lose people who don't like their lack of backbone more so than a vocal minority on social media.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Never got virgin. Just because they appear slightly less stuffy than more traditional businesses doesn't mean that Branson isn't a total bread head. Can't understand how people fall for his schtick.

I don’t think people necessarily fall for his schtick but his airline is quite nice. I like it anyway.

 

[spring hall convert]

One of the organisations they are after is John Lewis. They hardly pay lip service to these things. I did some work with them a few years ago and they are without doubt the gold standard in how a company should operate. Amongst other things employees have Final Salary pensions, employee bonuses that are worth having, John Lewis hotels that only its members can use at a reduced rate and it certainly wasn't a white male demographic we dealt with. Just because John Lewis advertise bed linen on Page 21 of the mail to a target audience of pensioners with more money than sense seems no reason to boycott them to me. If the Mail overstep the mark, that's a job for the PCC, not sure jumped up, perma offended Twitterati and people who spend too much time on Facebook. That said, the companies annoy me just as much. They are just as likely to lose people who don't like their lack of backbone more so than a vocal minority on social media.

Cool. So rather than cave into the twitterati why don't John Lewis use their considerable platform to educate the public on why it is a good thing for them to give money to newspapers who espouse messages completely contradictory to their own acknowledged excellent company ethos?

It's their call. All SFH have done is point out the contradiction.

 

[Iggle Piggle]

Cool. So rather than cave into the twitterati why don't John Lewis use their considerable platform to educate the public on why it is a good thing for them to give money to newspapers who espouse messages completely contradictory to their own acknowledged excellent company ethos?

It's their call. All SFH have done is point out the contradiction.

SFH are hardly politely pointing this stuff out. They create a social media shitstorm. As for JL they advertise in the mail as it clearly increases sales. Whilst it's not my cup of tea it's not the 3rd Reich press pamphlet either. Whilst they could be accused of having double standards they aren't alone and I'm prepared to cut them a break as they are the most ethical company I've ever dealt with. I've no idea why they choose to apologise instead of stating why they do these things. I presume its the easy option.

Personally, if people are that bothered about these things I'd rather they target charities who are funding terrorism or companies who give money to corrupt foreign governments (Without checking I think Waitrose has previously been accused of this but lets gloss over that otherwise it undermines my argument). The Mail is an easy target.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

SFH are hardly politely pointing this stuff out. They create a social media shitstorm. As for JL they advertise in the mail as it clearly increases sales. Whilst it's not my cup of tea it's not the 3rd Reich press pamphlet either. Whilst they could be accused of having double standards they aren't alone and I'm prepared to cut them a break as they are the most ethical company I've ever dealt with. I've no idea why they choose to apologise instead of stating why they do these things. I presume its the easy option.

Personally, if people are that bothered about these things I'd rather they target charities who are funding terrorism or companies who give money to corrupt foreign governments (Without checking I think Waitrose has previously been accused of this but lets gloss over that otherwise it undermines my argument). The Mail is an easy target.

They don't just target the Mail. The Express and even more so, the Sun. Even the Mirror has copped for criticism occasionally.

 

[spring hall convert]

Whilst they could be accused of having double standards they aren't alone and I'm prepared to cut them a break as they are the most ethical company I've ever dealt with.

I'd argue this is precisely why the question is asked of John Lewis. They are a company that trades on its ethics.

 

[looney]

Given that you obviously appear to assume you are part of the majority, it would be heartwarming if you put your dictum into practice, and extended to us noisy people the benfit of your silence.

This is where you become confused, quite often there is no majority as such because there is more than a binary choice, this confuses the the people like you who have a binary view of the world.ads

 

[royceyboy]

Shows how toxic the Mail is if Virgin has BINNED it, wonder what Beach Hut will read in the FIRST class on the way to work now

British Airways binned it too in December!

 

[looney]

Thank you for saving me the bother.

Back on topic, this is just 70 copies of one newspaper. It's hardly worth getting into a tizz about it.

Maybe you should aim that at the OP who thought it worthwhile starting the thread.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Popular misconception that Branson plays an active role in any of the businesses that carry the Virgin Branding. He doesn't. He just takes the cash. Virgin Trains, Virgin Media, Virgin Airlines etc are all 100% independent of each other and largely independent of him.

Assigning responsibility for this decision to Branson equates to blaming my 6 yr old daughter for the global financial crash.

I don't like him either btw...

Whilst all true, this has come from him.

The Virgin Gatwick lounges stopped supplying the Mail a while ago, on his say so.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Is broflake like a surfer thing, im thinking bill and teds excellent adventure?
It doesnt seem to work on any level apart for you somehow..........is it a star trek reference?its star trek isnt it?

Rather than post more bollocks, why not google it? As you appear to be having a senior moment I'll save you the trouble

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/broflake

noun, derogatory, informal: A man who is readily upset or offended by progressive attitudes that conflict with his more conventional or conservative views. ‘there was predictable disquiet from various broflakes on social media’

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

One of the organisations they are after is John Lewis. They hardly pay lip service to these things. I did some work with them a few years ago and they are without doubt the gold standard in how a company should operate. Amongst other things employees have Final Salary pensions, employee bonuses that are worth having, John Lewis hotels that only its members can use at a reduced rate and it certainly wasn't a white male demographic we dealt with. Just because John Lewis advertise bed linen on Page 21 of the mail to a target audience of pensioners with more money than sense seems no reason to boycott them to me. If the Mail overstep the mark, that's a job for the PCC, not sure jumped up, perma offended Twitterati and people who spend too much time on Facebook. That said, the companies annoy me just as much. They are just as likely to lose people who don't like their lack of backbone more so than a vocal minority on social media.

Actually, although I love Jim to bits, this argument is almost unassailable. Unfortunately, without reading all the guff in detail, I can't tell whether the 'campaign' is encouraging folk to not advertise in the Fail, or attempting to bully by boycott those who do. (all the slagging off on this thread has muddied the waters). If the latter then I am with you on this. If the former, then those others who keep huffing and puffing about lefties can sod off. Actually they can sod off anyway. I have plenty of right wing acquaintances, and even friends, and I wouldn't dream of laying into them for it every five seconds. FFS. Some do deserve to be reminded to give their head a wobble every few weeks though, I'll admit. Ahem.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

This is where you become confused, quite often there is no majority as such because there is more than a binary choice, this confuses the the people like you who have a binary view of the world.ads

Wow. That's one of the most insipid replies I have ever seen on here. You made a binary statement and clearly aligned yourself with the 'silent majority' as opposed to the 'noisy majority'. I will explain my reply since you clearly don't get it. I was inviting you to be true to your allegiance. I can explain in more detail if you need it.

 

[BLOCK F]

Quite. The only reason I read The Guardian is for its well researched, balanced, well written, insightful, objective, informative and open minded journalism. To suggest anything else is insulting.

Well; let us just say I disagree.
Huge left wing bias.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

what's wrong with the Daily Mail
regards
DR

 

[Lincoln Imp]

I'm no fan of the mail. I'm often staggered when I sift through a copy at the in laws at the scare mongering and hyperbole of the headlines to get a few tuts from a blue rinse in Tunbridge Wells.

That said, I hate this modern trend to stop advertising in the current bun by complaining on Twitter or in this case Branson deciding what we can and can't read. If someone wants to read why Melanie Philips thinks poor people should be shot or why immigration is terrible in the comfort of thier Spanish villa let them. It's a free country.

Printed newspapers have two income streams: retail sales and advertising. Anyone who thought it acceptable when football supporters organised a campaign against people giving the Sun their pennies in the newsagents can't suddenly complain when others organise campaigns against people giving the Mail advertising money. The two are exactly the same. (Obv if there is intimidation of potential purchasers in either case, that is wrong.)

 

[Jim in the West]

As ever, an interesting debate. My perspective is that the Daily Mail is entitled to print what it likes (within the law, obviously), and groups like Stop Funding Hate are, equally, entitled to campaign against the Daily Mail - again, as long as they do so within the law. This sort of activity is hardly new - it reminds me of the anti-apartheid campaigning in the 70s and 80s (and there will have been many thousands of similar campaigns before and after then). Personally I think the Daily Mail is a vile newspaper which seeks to enflame anti-immigrant, and particularly anti-muslim, sentiment. The SFH campaign may cause the DM to re-think its attitudes (in the same way that the boycotting of SA caused the regime there to re-think apartheid). If so, in my view, that's a positive outcome. But ultimately if the DM wants to carry on printing xenophobic cr*p it is, of course, perfectly entitled to do so for as long as we live in a functioning democracy.

 

[Iggle Piggle]

Printed newspapers have two income streams: retail sales and advertising. Anyone who thought it acceptable when football supporters organised a campaign against people giving the Sun their pennies in the newsagents can't suddenly complain when others organise campaigns against people giving the Mail advertising money. The two are exactly the same. (Obv if there is intimidation of potential purchasers in either case, that is wrong.)

I dont think you can compare the Mail and the sun in that way. The main argument against the Sun dates back to Hillsborough. Whilst the Mail has the odd opinion piece that is somewhere right of Nick Griffin they haven't had thier Hillsborough moment yet as far as I'm aware.

That said, I appreciate you are quoting my current bun post where I mixed up the paperchase hounding.

 

[clapham_gull]

In a world where the Mail says what it damn well likes, I do find it funny where people think there is censorship and political correctness.

Personally I'm a strong believer in free speech and I'm appalled by the no platform phenomenon.

This country is fantastically different from many others and soon calls an idiot out if you let them speak.

Keep them quiet and they look like a victim.

The editorial policy on this site sums us up. Everyone knows who the idiots are.

Please carry on.

Sent from my BTV-DL09 using Tapatalk

 

[pastafarian]

Rather than post more bollocks, why not google it? As you appear to be having a senior moment I'll save you the trouble

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/broflake

noun, derogatory, informal: A man who is readily upset or offended by progressive attitudes that conflict with his more conventional or conservative views. ‘there was predictable disquiet from various broflakes on social media’

As i had never heard of it before i did end up googling it.
seems there are multiple descriptions of the word, suggesting its a bit of a daft one.

Broflake
A Bro who makes it a habit to propose or commit to attending a social endeavor, but consistently makes various excuses and fails to attend at the last minute

Broflake
A man who thinks he's a "nice guy" and says he will "treat you like an actual humanbeing unlike other males". But if you reject him he says "you're missing out" or "weren't that pretty to begin with"

Broflake
A word used by Cucks. Supposed to be the opposite of a Snowflake. Very unoriginal and never caught on.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Broflake

Please carry on.