Go Fund Me made a big mistake deleting Israel Folau’s fundraiser
Go Fund Me made a mistake pulling down Israel Folau’s campaign, argues Patrick Southam. The fundraising website has taken sides – and that isn’t good for its brand.
Yesterday, fundraising website Go Fund Me entered the divisive free speech and religious freedom arena by announcing it had closed rugby star Israel Folau’s fundraising page. And in doing so, it’s alienated a good portion of its market and unwisely entered the murky territory of religious freedom versus LGBTIQ+ rights.
A couple of months ago, Folau shared his deeply-held religious views in a post on Instagram which stated that “hell awaits” drunks, homosexuals, adulterers, liars, fornicators, thieves, atheists and idolaters. Folau urged “sinners” to “repent”, which led to Rugby Australia tearing up his $4m contract last month, accusing him of a “high-level breach” of its player code of conduct.
Folau is challenging his sacking in the Fair Work Commission, arguing he was unlawfully axed for expressing his religious views, and last week launched a Go Fund Me campaign seeking to raise up to $3m to help fund his legal case.
“Why is it acceptable for Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young to use Go Fund Me to raise money for legal costs in her defamation battle, but not acceptable for Israel Folau to do the same?”
Because she didnt engage in hate speech.
spot on
Yep.
The hackneyed ‘hate speech’ argument.
So lets ban the largest religions in the world.
One more time…
This has nothing to do with his religion. There are millions of Christians all over the world who do not think like this. It’s everything to do with a set of bigoted beliefs. Religion is his excuse.
So the fact that he quoted from the bible and he is a minister of a church has nothing to do with religion. Oh really ?
Not sure what your point is. There are plenty of people who dress up bigotry as religion. It doesn’t change the fact that the issue is the bigotry, not the religion.
Hate speech in the name of religion doesn’t mean it’s not hate speech.
It has everything to do with religion. God [Edited under Mumbrella’s comment moderation policy] but loves the person. Israel should not have gotten fired for expressing his belief
Great idea!
Would be an excellent step for mankind
Since when did Israel engage in hate speech?
How would you describe the assertion that certain segments of the populace were destined for ‘hell’?
if you’re religious, then being ‘destined for hell’ is something you understand and accept within the context of your faith and so is not ‘hate speech’
if you’re not religious, then ‘hell’ is a mythical place and thus being destined for it is meaningless and laughable, meaning it can’t be ‘hate speech’
all the best with the rest of your day and I hope and predict you find something else to be angry about very soon
Just think outside your little bubble for a minute.
You’re a teenage Christian rugby fan, maybe with a Pacific Island background. But also struggling with your sexuality not fitting with what your family and friends see as normal.
Your idol bombards his social media with posts telling you that you are going to hell. It’s an eternity of the worst punishment imaginable.
It’s hardly “meaningless and laughable”.
2 shared.posts isn’t being bombarded.
I apologise for the affect these 2 religious posts has had on all of the gay south islander Christian teenage rugby players you know who idolise Falou.
Your comment is ridiculous.
If you are Christian, believe in God, and are homosexual… Repent your sins before you die.
If you aren’t Christian, don’t believe in God, and are homosexual, you probably don’t give a shit what Falou said in the first place.
If you are like me, and have completely nothing to do right now (I’m currently on a bus), give your irrelevant opinion that will be misinterpreted anyway.
OR…
IF YOU want to appear politically correct in the eyes of strangers, I suggest being completely outraged by someone sharing 2 religious posts on their social media account that targeted everyone on the planet.
Makes sense ?
Those were my thoughts too – it’s the kids you’ve gotta think about. Have a heart.
Israel Folau sincerely (I assume) believes hell exists, and that I and billions more deserve to go there, to be tortured for eternity. The hell isn’t real, but the hate is.
Best reply ever! Spot on.
neither did Folau, he genuinely believes that homosexuals will go to hell and is warning them out of compassion
Israel Folau did not engage in Hate Speech either. To be Hate Speech there needs to be malice intent. His voice was intended as a warning and the need for repentance of ‘sins’. I am not religious but it is clear from his trail of posts, they are religious in nature and the posts were made in good faith.
Homosexuals were not targeted any more than liars and fornicators. Some argue you are born Gay. Others may argue we are also born liars, as being able to lie is a developmental stage, and fornication is also a natural human state for self-replication. It appears to me the Christian faith, distinguishes sexual acts from the person. Catholics priests and nuns are supposed to abstain from sex: heterosexual or homosexual. They obviously see sexual behaviour as a choice: within a marriage, outside of marriage, for procreation etc.
It is sad those against Israel Folau are so intolerant of his religion. I understand that Israel Folau supported the campaign against homophobia and fronted a poster in solidarity. But his religion has views of sins that encompasses everybody. It does not mean he hates any group of people.
It’s not hate speech, it is religion (fear-mongering for population control).
If I have to accept the views and customs of other religions or be demonised and called ignorant and racist, I can deal with a shared meme on FB that targeted anyone who has ever lied, cheated, drunk, homosexual, idolist, atheist… Pretty sure that’s covered EVERYONE in some way.
But sure, we will forget all the other groups mentioned and fixate on just one minority group that will get people interested in this slow news week.
THE ONLY GROUP SINGLING OUT LGBTIQ AND HOMOSEXUALS IN THIS POST IS THE MEDIA.
If the meme didnt include the word homosexuals in the list, is everyone cool with liars, adulterers and drunks going to hell if they don’t repent?
Would we have even heard about this post at all?
Because she is fighting a defensible defamation action with a third party, not a contract breech with her employer.
Sorry, Go Fund Me is a private company and as such are allowed to choose what they ultimately decide their platform supports. *shrug* Freedom of speech does not equal freedom from consequence.
That’s right. However, GoFundMe will now suffer the consequences.
Oh, I think they’ll be just fine.
Will they go to hell too?
You have made a critical error here in asking “how can it justify excluding someone from their platform on the basis of his faith identity?”
The decision has nothing to do with Folau’s religion. It is entirely about someone raising money to support his desire to discriminate and victimise people based on their sexuality. It’s no different to if he had been sacked for making repeated racial slurs.
Folau didn’t just criticise people based on their sexuality – Drunks, Atheists, Fornicators (sex outside of marriage), Adulterers….pretty much everyone in the advertising industry. His quote is from the bible. It’s a strict interpretation of his faith.
The majority of us drunks, atheists and fornicators couldn’t give 2 hoots about Folau and the bible.
That’s the way everyone should take it. Ignore it. It’s an outdated quote from a collection of short stories written over a thousand years ago. We live in a free country where these things must be tolerated. Australia can’t be made into a safe space for the sensitive.
Hate speech is subjective, Folau doesn’t see it as hate speech….he honestly believes he is helping us by warning of the consequences of our misguided lifestyles.
I disagree strongly with Folau but support his right to believe in what the bible says, then share this view with his instagram followers.
According to Folau I’m on way to hell, can’t wait….should be a wild ride without those religious kill joys! See you there…..
There is a difference between “drunks, athiests, fornicators” and homosexuals. Vilifying people based on who they are, rather than what they do, is discrimination. When it relates to a minority group with a history of being discriminated against, where suicide rates are way above the average, this is hate speech. He may not see it that way but he doesn’t get to decide.
He can have this beliefs but he does not get to promote them without consequence.
Stop making excuses for this.
Males have a higher rate of suicide than females, so when the likes of Clementine Ford unfairly criticise and marginalise males, it is hate speech.
Thanks for your input. Must go and rest your brain now.
Have you ever read the quaran ? There’s a massive amount of “hate speech” in that journal. And many people of the Islam faith believe in the quaran so let’s ban Islam.
This is the point though Pete, and I don’t know how many times it needs to be said: it’s not about religion. Sure the quran has stuff in it that could be considered hate speech, just as the bible does. We accept that because freedom of religion is important and most muslims (and christians) don’t take it all literally.
If a high profile muslim sportsperson started coming out with the bad stuff through their social media, telling people through they deserved to die, or deserved the worst punishment their god could mete out, because of their race or religion or sexuality, there would be consequences. Maybe they’d lose their contract or sponsors.
Stu, you keep expressing frustration that you have to keep repeating that its got nothing to do with religion. The very fact that you keep having to repeat this is probably a good indicator that its an unconvincing viewpoint.
You can keep repeating the line and may genuinely believe it – but others don’t.
Wow, how is that victim hierarchy working out for you today 🙂
???
acting on homosexuality is a choice
Are you kidding with that comment ‘Papyaboys’
Can your clarity what you mean by that statement?
And just a reminder, it’s 2019…
His quote is NOT from the bible. If you look at his Instagram feed, where he quotes the Galatian’s passage that was the original source of the image, it does not include any reference to gays or homosexuals at all. Homosexuals have been specifically added in to the verse, indicating he was well aware of exactly who he was targeting and why – the fact that he believes we need saving is irrelevant – it’s like saying someone believes that black people are inferior – that’s the problem in itself. (And btw. saying “he was just quoting the bible” is like saying “it’s ok to be anti-semetic provided you do it by quoting Mein Kampf” )
that is a lie. the bible clearly refers to homosexuals
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Corinthians+6%3A9-10&version=NKJV
Your link is to the NEW King James Version (c.1980s). Click on the original King James Version (1600s) and voila, ‘homosexuals’ not mentioned. And then there’s the original Greek texts the bible was translated from. Looks like @It’snotfromthebible! might be right…
Yep, and this is exactly why religions are evil (especially Catholic)
It isn’t about theology, it’s about power and control.
Gee, the word of god morphed into something that the church wanted to say in the NKJV from the KJV.
It’s not like God changed his mind and decided to whisper in the ear of whomever was doing the revision on NKJV.
It’s just a shame that when they did the NKJV, they didn’t include kiddy fiddlers.
This is why Australia needs a Bill of Rights to protect free speech. It would provide a protection from speech that some people disagree with. Speech that people agree with doesn’t need protection!
You can already say whatever you want.
It doesn’t mean that you should not be accountable to the social norms for what you say, quote the opposite.
If you cannot handle that, then perhaps you should not speak up. Live by what you say, die by what you say.
… for explaining to gay people everywhere what they should and shouldn’t be offended by.
Could you do racism next?
well said
How did he discriminate and victimized people? He shared what was written in the Bible. And if you don’t believe in the Bible why are you and the rest of the bible bashers here are so upset about? Is it because somewhere deep inside you you believe that hell exists?
I completely disagree with the comparison to Sarah Hanson-Young – she was raising money to fight being defamed by a parliamentarian colleague while Folau is raising funds to fight what he says is unfair dismissal – he was warned more than once about how his actions broke his code of conduct agreement with Rugby Australia.
The issue here isn’t freedom of religion – it’s really about expectations of how we are allowed to act on social media and how that may reflect on our employers. There’s lots of examples we could look at to realise what happened with Folau isn’t that extraordinary – Clem Ford’s tweets about the PM got her in trouble with her employer, the Cricket Australia employee sacked over comments about abortion reform (https://www.smh.com.au/national/cricket-australia-sacks-worker-over-series-of-tweets-about-abortion-20180729-p4zuar.html) – most companies have policies on how you can and cannot act on social media, according to Rugby Australia, Folau broke their policy.
If he had posted something about his religion that wasn’t threatening or harmful to other members of our very broad Australian community, it might have have been ok. This isn’t about if you agree with what Folau said or not, the fact is he broke the policy. If I broke the policy at my place of employment, I would have to accept the consequences.
Also, I’d much rather a brand to take a stance on these types of issues than to sit on the fence – be brave and put a line in the sand even if it does take some time to consider where that line is.
If Folau wants to fight his sacking, he is free to do so but trying to raise money for it while his tweet sits right there still hurting part of our Australian community, than its important for platforms like Go Fund Me to consider and make a choice about being associated with views like that.
“But, is this really the space a feel-good brand like Go Fund Me should be entering? Go Fund Me is about helping sick kids, cancer sufferers and supporting good causes. Rightly, or wrongly, being seen to take sides in such a febrile environment is not good for business, or the brand. And alienating a good portion of your market is not smart. ”
Lots of brands have views on matter that aren’t directly related to their business – and essentially, is supporting Folau a good cause? I’d say not, after all he has the funds to pay his own legal costs.
Agreed that Folau broke Rugby Australia’s policy and therefore they have the right to terminate his contract. However, I don’t think that that was the point of the article – it was only there as context. The issue is with Go Fund Me’s decision to take down Folau’s fundraiser.
Interesting point about brands taking a stance on certain issues. I’d question whether Go Fund Me is a brand first or a platform first. If it is a platform like Twitter, Kickstarter and Youtube, it should be open for everyone to use.
This means allowing Folau to make his case regardless of whether he’s right or wrong. And that means allowing potential donors to have the freedom to decide whether Folau is a good cause or not, not making that decision for them.
As much as I dislike Folau, this is a slippery slope into censorship.
This is such nonsense. Platforms need to be responsible for their content and if that content is illegal hate speech then it needs to be removed. No doubt those who think ‘everyone has the right to be a bigot’ will call it censorship. Further, if the platform has an established policy of not providing space for discrimination, then it should act on that in a timely manner.
but the content on GoFundMe wasn’t ‘illegal hate speech’, or ‘providing space for discrimination’. It was a man asking for financial support to fund his legal battle on a platform designed for people to ask for financial support.
I don’t at all believe in what Folau stated (I’m a drunk and a fornicator so he was sending me to hell too) but I absolutely believe he has the right to defend himself in court.
And I wouldn’t for a second consider giving him one cent as there are millions of more worthy causes. But on that platform, I believe he has as much right to ask for funds as some others and if non health/penury related requests for funds are allowed, including those by people asking for funds to fight legal action, then I don’t believe they should have closed it down.
Then by that logic, shouldn’t people be outraged that Instagram didn’t take down that post? It’s still up last time I checked.
Yes, platforms are responsible for the content posted on it within reason but I would hardly qualify it as ‘illegal hate speech’. He’s not inciting violence, using vulgar language, making threats or in a position to provide prejudicial treatment.
And why shouldn’t everyone have the right to be a bigot? I’d rather live in a society where people are comfortable enough to voice their views and have a public or civil discussion, than for people to have to bottle it up in fear or persecution.
I think you’ll find that YouTube and other platforms have pretty clear content policies and are currently spending significant amounts of money on moderation to ensure hateful or harmful content isn’t on their platforms.
If you’re using Youtube as an example, their definition of hateful content is “content that promotes or condones violence against individuals or groups based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, nationality, veteran status, or sexual orientation/gender identity, or whose primary purpose is inciting hatred on the basis of these core characteristics.”
Does Folau’s post really fall into this category? Even as a person reading the post as a ‘target’ (atheist, fornicator, etc.), I don’t think it quite falls into this definition.
Also, you’ll easily find ‘hateful’ content on YT where after policy review, remained on the platform but demonitised due to brand safety (e.g. Vox v Crowder).
I can just imagine Reputation Edge’s competitors doing back flips of joy on this one! Suggesting that a brand that has a well known corporate charter around LGBTQI inclusion, simply discard it when the going gets tough…DURING PRIDE MONTH.
What a car crash.
Definitely not a good look on Reputation Edge when their co-founder is so ignorant. Gofundme has a history of supporting LGBTIQ+ issues and not allowing campaigns which are defending intolerance. This is completely in line with their brand.
There is not a single paragraph in his article that does not contain a fallacious argument. Embarrassing and irresponsible that this was published.
Really? I would much more respect counsel that separates from the herd mentality and presents a different point of view that another virtue signaling its pride month opinion.
Go Fund Me got my attention — and my vote
A number of crowdfunding sites around the world have faced issues with people misrepresenting basic facts while raising money. This ends up leading to legal battles and lawsuits. It was pretty obvious that this was going to end in tears for GoFundMe.
This has been a PR disaster for GoFundMe right from the start. Yes, it is worth asking what pressure was causing them to wait before acting. Clearly they felt it worth wearing huge social media backlash for a week.
Whatever you think about LGBTI issues, GoFundMe seems to have been lax in the past enforcing their terms and conditions. So it looked bad when they finally enforced their own rules.
Oh puhlease… apart from the valid points made in the comments above, if you’d bothered to read Folau’s Go FundMe page, he explicitly stated “In making this contribution I acknowledge that my contributions are made freely as a gift on the basis previously affirmed and that there will be no obligations on Israel Folau to do anything for me in recognition of the gift OR TO APPLY THE FUNDS IN ANY PARTICULAR WAY WITH RESPECT TO THIS LEGAL ACTION [my capitals], and that I hold no expectation to receive anything in return for my contribution.”
So regardless of whether or not he proceeded with legal action, or only spent a fraction of the money raised on legal fees, he was admitting he could spend the money as he saw fit.
Maybe this is the GoFundMe that Folau needs.
https://www.gofundme.com/help-israel-folau-to-study-contract-law?fbclid=IwAR3W6kryjPwfaPXugcg-IBvCJjI9P0-qUmNqWpMDoRGRZZKJJJFYAzHxp2U
Why didn’t GFM pull down Will “Egg Boy” Connolly’s page given its anti-violence policy and the initial intention of the appeal to fund his legal representation for an admitted violent act? Is GFM “absolutely committed” to hypocrisy?
Egg Boy didn’t start the GFM page. It was started by a punter who like thousands of us admire his courage standing up to a fascist. It’s also noteworthy that Egg Boy gave all the money to the victims of the shooting. The planet is not black and white.
Kev. The original comment (1) leaves open the origins of the page and (2) refers to the initial (repeat initial) stated intention of the appeal, questioning why GFM didn’t act at the initial stage, as with Folau. The eventual fate of the funds was not questioned.
There are no equivalent ‘sides’ here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence
Nor is it relevant to use Whataboutism:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
Are you sure that arguing in favour of contract-breaking millionaires who engage in hate speech against minorities is on brand for Reputation Edge? You do risk alienating half your market.
As others have already said, the comparison to SHY makes no sense as she was defending herself from defamation in her workplace, not engaging in it!
I don’t think anyone should be allowed to fundraise to launch legal action. Defend maybe, that’s a grey area for me. But if you don’t have the balls (eg Folau) or don’t have the money and determination (eg people who can’t afford law teams learning about the law to represent themselves) to back your legal action then why should you rely on anyone else.
The decision had nothing to do with Folau’s religion and everything to do with breaking terms of a contract – terms that he was made well aware of beforehand. “god” forbid he’d have to sell one of his houses to pay his legal bills after he knowingly fucked up.
And just on the hate speech topic… It’s been a while since I went to church, but I always thought Christianity had everything to do with being nice to people… at least that’s what their Founder was hoping for. #whatdoyoupeopleactuallystandfor #wouldjesusunfriendyou? #nohewouldntbecausehesjesusandhesaniceguybuthewouldgiveyouthelookyourmumgivesyouwhenshesdisappointedinyou
I disagree. Go Fund Me has clear terms and conditions around hate and discrimination The argument against Folau using it concerns these, not his religion. If he was raising funds for a legal case against a body that discriminated against him being a Christian that would be different. He is not. He is arguing the right to use hate speech and to discriminate. Freedom of speech is vital in our society but there are important exclusions when that speech evokes discrimination, intimidation and even violence.
Horrible piece lol… GFM didn’t take it down because of public pressure or an ‘opinion’… T&Cs are pretty clear it will/can remove funds “for the legal defence of alleged crimes associated with hate, violence, harassment, bullying, discrimination, terrorism or intolerance of any kind relating to race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, sex, gender or gender identity or serious disabilities or diseases”.
You’re right, that’s so much of an alleged crime… living out your faith. Israel Folau has the guts to stand by what he believes, even when he has so much to lose.
It is absolutely possible to live out your faith without publicly posting cherry picked elements of it that are hateful to specific groups of people.
“Patrick Southam made a big mistake commenting about Go Fund Me’s decision to delete Israel Folau’s fundraiser.
The co-founder of Reputation Edge has taken sides – and that isn’t good for his brand.”
Love this. Who told him that was a smart move.
Israel Folau is completely within his rights to take legal action if he perceives his legal rights have been violated. NO-ONE is suggesting otherwise. However, Israel Folau is, by any measure, a wealthy person and does not appear to have the strength of his convictions – he seems unwilling to put up his own money in this fight.
Religious freedom means the freedom to practise religion without fear or favour. It does NOT mean preaching hate speech in a public forum – which he has done. Again, Israel Folau can test this in a court of law if he wishes to.
Unlawful discrimination – again he is able to test this in a court of law if he wishes to.
As others have said, GFM is a private business, and can choose to conduct business with whomever it pleases. Which also means it can also choose to NOT conduct business with whomever it pleases. To suggest it took GFM “almost a week” to make a decision, and to suggest that decision was based on media backlash, is naive. With such a high profile activity, any organisation will not rush to make a decision, but will instead take time to review all information and make a considered decision.
The author has made a few broad stroke statements, and has omitted (chosen) to consider more than the superficial facts of the matter. This is not a token gesture by Israel Folau, and has extremely far-reaching consequences for many many people.
Patrick I understand why you would jump on this as an opportunity to position your business but I think this time you might have made a big mistake. Your response needed more thought. Many holes, well identified in the comments above.
Conversely would Reputation Edge support an employee who demonises minorities who maybe also the client audience, while clients’ and partners’ PR interests are at risk from the same?
Why on earth would this Patrick Southam put his brand and name against this? Surely send him off to Europe with the other agency bosses to avoid burn-out.
When people create an argument while twisting the facts, it’s called SOPHISTRY. Making a deception by using clever but false arguments.
Sound familiar?
Politicians do it all the time and I, for one, am not just sick of it, I’m becoming depressed by it.
That, and the outright lies (which, as we know, repeated enough become accepted).
Folau breached the rules of his employment several times, was warned and ultimately fired. The ONLY way he can bring an action is to assert the terms of his employment were unlawful i.e. he should not have been prevented from saying anything he wishes. Good luck with that one.
If he wins, the judgement will impact what Public Servants can say, Whistleblowers will be empowered by a ruling that suppression of speech cannot form an employment agreement. Maybe no more Official Secrets Act?
No more AFP raids over leaks, no more back-benchers being gagged. Dutton will be shaking in his boots.
Your website promises “Your reputation is in safe hands with us”. Unfortunately, you don’t understand brands or branding, so I doubt my brand reputation would be safe in your hands. Investor and corporate affairs are your thing, and I suggest you stick to your knitting.
Just for the record, when a brand stands for something it’s not “taking sides”. It’s being true to its purpose, beliefs, and stand in the world and community. That’s called great branding. And yes, it does mean NOT being all things to all people. Yes, when you stand for something you WILL “alienate a portion of your market”. That’s also called great branding.
This.
All Folau had to do was preceded his (to me) antediluvian views with “I think” rather than expressing them as fact. This whole beat up on religious freedom, in an environment where attendance at the various Christian denominations has never been lower, is a foil from people like the ACL. The sooner all religions lose their tax free status, the better.
RE: “the murky territory of religious freedom versus LGBTIQ+ rights”
I’m not sure that this is an accurate description of the two sides in this battle.
Surely it’s the crystal clear territory of discrimination vs freedom.
If an attack on another human being’s rights can be classed as a ‘freedom’ worth fighting for, then perhaps it’s time to throw in the towel.
…or just ignore this fool and stop talking about him.
GoFundMe has my business
Reputation Edge definitely doesn’t!
Summed up in 2 simple sentences Dante.
There are so many angled opinions, there is even one who implores “Please don’t pick and choose facts” and then goes ahead and picks one.
As human beings, we should be kind to each other, but there is no power on earth that can force one to like another, or agree with another, and in spite of codes and laws and agreements signed in blood, the mind remains flexible, the individual retains the right to self-determination and self-opinion.
How many who signed the football club agreement actually believe its codes in earnest? Did all our Prime Ministers swear to uphold the crown, the queen and her successors with a full heart and true spirit? Maybe they did, but I can’t help doubting it.
The words Folau wrote regarding those whom he claims to believe are going to hell, were as a result of religious indoctrination and his interpretation of a questionable book that is purported to be the gospel, yet many people agree that this nonsense should be given credence and even highly revered.
We must be kind to each other, we may accept homosexuality or we may reject it, that is down to our own moral and social judgement, but we may not discriminate against those who have a different sexual orientation or persuasion to our own, any more than we may discriminate against those who believe or not in the bible and its many interpretations.
Twist and turn this any way you will, this man is being condemned by his fellow human beings, which is a large group made up of all walks of life, including a few morally upright individuals, but many more quite socially acceptable drunks, homosexuals, adulterers, liars, fornicators, thieves, atheists and idolaters.
That’s a bad, bad take. And unfortunately typical of the internet and social media now which is more and more just a trashfire of people saying the most outrageous and blatantly idiotic nonsense for hate clicks. Just one more person riding the Folau hate wave to try and make a buck. Seriously bad.
Four words in their Terms enable GFM to do whatever they like, whenever they like – “in our sole discretion”. Full para 8 Term here:
8. campaigns we deem, in our sole discretion, to be in support of, or for the legal defense of alleged crimes associated with hate, violence, harassment, bullying, discrimination, terrorism, or intolerance of any kind relating to race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, sex, gender or gender identity, or serious disabilities or diseases;
No they don’t. If they did, they wouldn’t have to mention why.
No mistake made
“The following are examples of Content and/or use that is illegal or prohibited by GoFundMe …
8. campaigns we deem, in our sole discretion, to be in support of, or for the legal defense of alleged crimes associated with hate, violence, harassment, bullying, discrimination, terrorism, or intolerance of any kind relating to race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, sex, gender or gender identity, or serious disabilities or diseases”
Guess what. Campaign deleted.
Then you should also think about why he needed to pay for lawyers at all. Oh that’s right – he broke the terms of his contract.
Little boy (he sure isn’t a MAN) deserves no pity at all
Do you believe he committed a crime or broke a private contract?
I believe he broke a private contract.
They are two different things. Go Fund Me T&Cs are about committing a crime. Read what you have just put up.
I don’t particularly like the guy, or would give him money but GoFundMe has no right to remove him as he DID NOT COMMIT A CRIME. He’s now getting more money as a result.
The radical mob crowd, who don’t believe in freedom, has played into his hands.
At 324pm on the Australian Christian Lobby fundraising page, they’ve raised 834k under the banner of ‘religious freedom’ Interesting the smallest donation you can give is $50. a great example of behavioural design. He’s going to crack 1m by 6pm at this rate.
Australia will have forgotten GFM by Wednesday morning
Good luck to him. It’s obviously not hard to find hateful fools ready to give their money to an idiotic cause.
Still the right thing for GoFundMe to do.
$867k by 4.38pm…. Who knew Jebus could inspire so many people to give?!!
At this rate, we could feed and clothe the homeless in Sydney or Melbourne, like the good people that we are… yaaaayyy Jeebus!
Oh wait…
For some reason everyone here believes he broke his contract with his Instagram. Those in the know understand as a professional rugby player, he was covered by a collective bargaining agreement ( hence why even at his salary it will be heard by Fair Work ). Even after his first warning, and a new contract, Rugby Australia could not introduce anything into his employment contract because the terms of the EBA with the players union mean no single player can be signed on specific terms “less” or more “stringent” than the collective agreement.
I think R.A will lose, because its not about free speech, hate speech or religious freedom…..Its about what was in his contract as an employee.
The personal irony for me with this story is the first employment contract I signed more than 25 years ago in less enlightened times had a clause for dismissal if I brought the company into disrepute. When I asked what could constitute that…the example that was given, believe it or not was “if you were filmed on a float at the Mardi Gras ” Take some time to check your own company policies and employment contracts and be aware that more and more of us don’t have the ability to claim a personal position vs a professional position.
Because she’s using it to STOP hate Speech. Folau is using it to defend Hate Speech
Never got a refund from gofundme
Where has my money gone go fundme??
bunch of crooks
Well fucking done to Go Fund Me for taking down a page about bigoted personal beliefs that have no basis in fact. I’m particularly tickled by the belief that all homosexuals are atheists and fornicators. They sound like they’d be great to go for a beer with.
What a silly little clickbaity article this is.
One word. Wrong.
[Edited under Mumbrella’s comment moderation policy]
[Edited under Mumbrella’s comment moderation policy]
Your wrong go fund me clearly have a rainbow flag in their site in support of the gay community how could he possibly allow one that spews hate against the gay community to keep their page they had to do what they did drop him like a tonne of bricks plus it’s not what go fund me was set up for .
The best brands know they can’t please all the people all the time…
https://lbbonline.com/news/the-best-brands-know-they-cant-please-all-the-people-all-the-time/?mc_cid=9ebccf2c40&mc_eid=d20ab3285d
go FUnd mE madE A bIG misTAke DelEtiNg iSraEL FOlau’s FUNdRAIseR
*eye roll*
No, Patrick – the Go Fund Me brand is enhanced by this action, not diminished.
When Salesforce threatened to pull all of its business out of the state of Indiana when a religious freedom law was about to be introduced that would allow discrimination of LGBTQ people, they reinforced their values around making the world more equal. When Nike featured Colin Kaepernick in its campaign, they took a clear political stance and demonstrated that integrity is a key value they are fully committed to.
These are businesses that know what their purpose is and are true to fulfilling it, even if it means alienating a group whose values don’t align. This is called courageous leadership and only creates greater brand love for the audience they are committed to serving. It also delivers on stock price – purpose-driven brands outperform the stock market by 10 times on average.
It appears your notions of brand reputation are mired exclusively in defensive risk mitigation – if they indeed “taking sides” then Go Fund Me is engaging in smart, offensive brand management.
Everyone calm the f*ck down. And consider for a moment that for a secular organisation like Go Fund Me, tossing a bible thumper out on his ass is a great way to polish the brand.
When you stand for something, you have to take sides. Not taking sides is the devil’s work.
Oh, and Patrick, I presume your line about ‘supporting a Christian millionaire’s fundraising activities’ is satire.
I’m right, right?
I couldn’t disagree with you more, Patrick. Despite your opinion of Go Fund Me’s risky move to align with equality, we are seeing the impetus for brands and companies to take a moral stand, or to showcase what they stand for more and more. Whilst alienating some of their clientele, they would have gained a large number more through this move.
When people are angry, they make mistakes – and the lefties, whose natural disposition is in any case one of extreme ill-temper, are very, very, angry indeed. In fact they are having a collective conniption that sees them fairly frothing at the mouth, and their ranting and raving is quite something to behold.
First they have had to endure the ignominy of watching Bill Shorten, the epitome of gormlessness, lose the “climate change election” because the plebs refused to prostrate themselves before the faux intellectuals of the self-appointed “elites”. Now this upstart Israel Folau has the bare-faced cheek to trust in Jesus Christ for his salvation, and worse, to openly speak about his faith in the hope that others might join him, and thus be spared perdition’s eternal flames.
And so those on the left, as angry as they are, have quite predictably blundered, and in a serious way. People in this country are tolerant and easy-going for the most part, but one thing they will not brook is having jumped up neurally-challenged nobodies telling what they can and cannot do and say. We are the descendants of those who fought and died to make this country great and keep it free, and now the left has let it slip that their plan is to steal that freedom – to enslave every single person, and to destroy those who resist. So now there are some people donating to Israel not because they agree with what he has said, but because they are quite rightly disgusted by the mindless vindictiveness of his attackers, and because they clearly understand that although this is for now the beginning of a pogrom against Christians, it will soon enough be something that is knocking at everyone’s door.
I AGREE 100000000000000000% with you. This was an appalling decision that so many businesses and sports bodies think they need to add their opinion to.
This entire situation is about freedom of liberties.
So many SJW are just clueless on this.
The man is a homophobe an cherry picks his own bits an pieces from the bible!So straight people who do evil acts are better than people who are born gay?Ridiculous!The NRL warned him,he ignored it,understood the codes social media obligations an even compared gays to drug addicts!The man has more than enough money of his own an the church has been persecuting an bullying gay people for a very long time!End of story!!!!
I applaud their action and stance on this.
Ever noticed the number of eminent persons in the legal profession who regularly jump to provide pro-bono legal advice and representation when they feel the case has merit, limits religious or other freedoms, is a winnable position, is in support of their religious beliefs (aka often the Catholic church).
Doesn’t it speak volumes that Folau has not been provided such assistance and representation?
Why has he targeted to raise funds many times larger than the actual estimated costs of such an action and put in his T&Cs that he can spend the funds on anything he likes and not necessarily on the proceedings?
Why does a multi-millionaire have to play on the religious card to raise funds to fight a straightforward contract breech dismissal case that has nothing to do with freedom of speech or religious freedom? (BTW: Some people watch too much Hollywood guff. This is not the USA and we do not have a first amendment nor any legal basis for alleged freedom of speech)
The repercussions of a tweet by a man in sport who is looked up to by many young kids dealing with their own sexual identity is deeper than you can know. There are young teens out there now who will have been deeply affected and badly hurt by what he said. Some may even have attempted to take their own lives. He does not deserve to be funded to get financial or any other support through a shit storm only he is responsible for making. Let him suffer the consequences of his ignorant personal views.
Say no to hate speach of any kind.
I’m an atheist and couldn’t give a monkey’s what IF reckons will happen to me. Hate speech ? Nah…. just advice that I think is a bit misguided, but hang on I’ve got something more important to think about like what’s for dinner tonight.
[Edited under Mumbrella’s comment moderation policy]