Members of ad industry pledge not to work on anti-same sex marriage campaign and ‘Say No to No’

Let’s hope the big media company’s get on board too. That would be something. Well done to all those involved.

Best news I’ve heard all day.

The industry should mind its own business (and that of its clients) rather than playing amateur politics.

As the bandwagon has been rolled out, will the industry apply this fervour to other socially harmful categories such as gambling or are we being ethically selective?

dumb and ignorant.

Looking forward to the morals police also enforcing the “say no” campaign for gambling, smoking, alcohol and sex products.

But that’s not happening, is it? Let’s cash in on the gays though.

Meanwhile we can silence dissenting opinions like it’s North Korea.

I’m sure this makes the people involved feel like they’re doing something positive, but ultimately like almost all political ranting on social media, from sharing Paul Walton to changing our profile pics to having rainbows on them, it is just singing into the wind and won’t change 1 single opinion.

I also feel slightly squeamish about the entitlement in the quote from Nick Cummins calling ads that he has never seen ‘harmful’ purely because they would be arguing a point of viewpoint different to the one he proposes. The shaming of opposing viewpoints and those holding them is a tactic that has twice backfired on the left in the last 15 months

Sounds like yet another example of left-wing bullying behaviour.

Great point!

I think many of the naysayers here have missed the point. This is not about refusing to promote an alternative political view or denying the right to an opinion. Rather, it’s about refusing to work on what is very likely to be highly negative, unnecessarily divisive messaging which will cause immense damage and pain to many members of the community. This is about protecting against vilification, not restricting freedom of speech.

Oh, but we know how a very vocal minority feel about that ….

They are minding their business. They are entitled to conduct their business however they see fit.

The entire Crocodile fan base has come out in support of http://www.educateyourselfifyo.....ant.com.au

Is that your pitch for the “Vote No” campaign?

but you see, by predicting that the other side of this argument will be negative, divisive and causing damage and pain with no evidence whatsover, it’s actually you that is being divisive and villifying – it’s a pre-emptive ad hominem attack to denigrate people who hold an opposing viewpoint in an attempt to undermine their position

Seems like quite a few people upset that some agencies are prepared to stand up and support their colleagues, family, friends and clients who will potentially be negatively affected by the “no” campaign. The attempt to draw an analogy with other questionable campaigns is completely without merit. Cigarettes are not allowed to be advertised so it’s not a choice we’re asked to make. Gambling and alcohol and yes, sex toys are heavily regulated in terms of how they can be marketed and to whom and when.

But there are to be zero restrictions placed on how damaging the “no” campaign is able to get. The legislation that covers “truth in political advertising” does not apply. Nor are both sides entitled to equal time. “No” campaigners will be able to claim whatever they like, about whoever they want. They’re already positioning to make this about “saving gender”, “saving children”, “saving families” and my personal favourite, saving the words “husband” and “wife” (apparently gay people want to make these words illegal…who knew?). I’ve even seen one group today claiming that gay people should not be allowed to be married because “they have higher rates of suicide”. Eh? Oh and about that…

So you know what? If you want to be the person who helps the “no” campaigners get their messages out, that’s your choice. Knock yourself out. In five years, ten years, twenty years time…I’m going to be very comfortable with my choice not to, and if you can say the same then best of luck to you.

What is the $122 million non binding postal survey…totally agree

What is …the $122 million non binding postal survey??

What have sex products got to do with it?

So the PC moral police from the left have now infiltrated the ad industry. This is just so hypocritical

Does that apply when, say, Christian bakers choose not to bake cakes for a gay wedding?

@ Ingmar – aren’t they doing what you said – that is minding their own business? They’re taking a stand in something they (and the vast majority of Australians) believe in. Would you rather they blindly do their clients bidding?

The individuals who drove the say no to no campaign should be applauded. How this is even a debate in 2017 Fucking astounds me. The anti-side literally cannot run a campaign without saying members of the LGBTI community are somehow less than straight people. The agencies involved are saying no to this. Fair play to The Royals and all involved – and no I don’t work for them.

As opposed to restricting the choices of consenting adults, caused by a rule passed without public scrutiny in 24 hours? So not that sort of bullying?

Putting liberty as a reason for same-sex marriage also requires that we maintain liberty around speech and its hard to argue for tolerance when we come from a position of intolerance towards free speech.

Moral police? We are trying to undo a piece of legislation that is legally enforcing one particular view of morality. It’s the exact opposite of the moral police.

So is the ad industry going to boycott “Say No to Yes” as well? I think not. It does not suit their political agenda now does it!

People’s feelings are hurt on the other side of the argument too in this SMS debate with all the continuous vile abuse & bullying that is being hurled at them but this does not get mentioned.

So as a creative, would working on this be a Career Ending Manoeuvre (CEM)?

From what we’ve seen from proponents thus far, I have feeling it would be.
And there’s an inference within this article that yes the industry would find a way to punish any dissenters.

Blatantly unfair. Democracy is just about dead. If lobby groups get their way regardless of who’s elected then what’s the point of elections anymore?

Yeah, by taking the moral high ground

It is not a prediction…it is already happening. The people against SSM are already acting in a disgusting, name calling way…and they are hurting people. The fact is, that your type of people have persecuted gay people for hundreds of years…and now that you are in the minority, you want to shout about being persecuted yourselves? It boggles the mind… Go pray to your God, no one is stopping you – but dont try and stop other people doing what they want to as well. You are on the losing side…get used to it.

you’re not the sharpest knife in the drawer are you love

It is not a ‘political agenda’…it is the right thing to do. I am sure that gay people and their millions of straight friends are sorry that your ‘feelings are hurt’ because gay people are going to get married, but suck it up buddy. It actually doesnt affect you. And after centuries of gay people being persecuted, and in many cases actually killed, maybe your hurt feelings dont really matter if they want to have equal rights. Perhaps?

If you’re asking if I’m worried about hurting the feelings of people who do not believe LGBTI people deserve equal rights, the answer is no. The desire for that side to claim victimhood is laughable.

Free speech ?

Would you be as ok and as fervent a supporter if we removed ‘same sex’ and said interracial?

also, what Rachel said,

1) Boycott campaign created by creative agency who is the lead on the ‘Yes’ campaign. Guaranteed impressions, column cms, tv and radio coverage
2) A campaign about inclusivity supports exclusivity
3) Smacks of Trumpism, if you aren’t with us, then you must be against us

I am voting yes because I detest Tony Abbott.

As long as australians are made aware of bigot bakers so we can boycott them out of business i see no issue with your proposal.

are you suggesting people shouldnt take the high ground? its called that because its better….

Dear, oh dear, of dear.

So I gather you’ve not seen the bile that Shelton’s ACL are already sprouting … they seem to have had a head-start as well.

But seldom do you see a national leader so willingly emasculate themselves and their government through lack of spine and deafness to the majority opinion. These numbskulls have forgotten that the represent the people of Australia and not the brownshirt religious right of an increasingly divided and meaningless political party.

Don’t vent your anger at them by not voting. Vote Yes.

Then take your anger out at the next Federal election (and have a long memory).

THANK YOU! It means so much to so many of us to see the support from the wider community. As often happens in adversity, acts of courage and kinship emerge that lift the spirits of those who are hurting at this time.

Well, I’m glad you feel you’ve taken the superior moral choice on this issue. And good luck to the deplorables!

Yes, that’s how the left now work. Shut-down, bully, ridicule & intimidate (even physically) if you don’t agree with their views. They used to be free speech but that doesn’t fit their movement anymore. Be careful.

Looking forward to the industry’s stance on free speech. Will they take on clients who argue for it or against it?

They already do. If an agency doesn’t want to work on a gambling account, they don’t. Every pitch that comes in is a decision. Is it a cultural fit for the agency, is it a good choice for our skill set, is it going to boost our profile…This just happens to be about giving the industry a platform to rally around. Support it if you will, don’t if you won’t. Many already do. Simple.

What’s wrong with gambling, smoking, alcohol and ‘sex products’? They don’t resteict human rights. Entirely different conversation. Besides, no one is ‘enforcing’ anything…except that members of our population don’t have the same marriage rights as others.

Ah if the opposition is telling members of the population and their children that who they choose to love is ‘wrong’ then yeah, it’s probably going to cause damage.

Add M&CSaatchi group to that list

I doubt it. Things blow over so fast in advertising there’s always something else to worry about. Plus, you’re hardly going to get anywhere by hiring only anti-gay specialists.

One of the things I love about advertising is how interesting and diverse the people are. So I put my name on the website. If it stops me getting a job, that’s fine, I’ll go work in a more tolerant industry.

Sure. If you don’t agree with something, you don’t have to support it. But – and this is a very important but – it doesn’t mean you have the right to stop it happening.

That’s the big distinction the NO campaign is missing.

Not sure what you’re getting at. Isn’t the moral high ground precisely where you want to be?

Acceptance, tolerance, diversity. That is the moral high ground. Anything else is morally deficient.

Not sure what you’re getting at. Isn’t the moral high ground where you want to be?

Acceptance, tolerance, diversity. That is the moral high ground. Anything else is morally deficient.

They can if they like. Nobody is stopping them. You’re welcome to start it up.

You are right about one thing: it is a shame so much venom is being bandied about. However, what you’re seeing, is of course what will happen after decades and decades of suppression and marginalisation. Eventually people are going to fight back. Are you really that surprised?

The baker in your example is actively discriminating against a couple because of who they are.

The ad agency is choosing not to work on a campaign to influence others to have a say in a non-binding vote so that the governing representatives can get an indication on whether they should draft a bill so that all the representatives that were elected by the population could vote about whether we should legally recognise gay marriage.

But your question was rhetorical right?

How does gambling, smoking, alcohol and sex products discriminate against people because of who they are?

And what’s immoral about sex products?

It’s about discrimination about who people are, not what they choose to do.

I’ll bite.

Give me one example why we should note “No” that is not hurtful or divisive.

I can’t think of a single argument how allowing gay marriage is going to hurt people.

Yeah but smokers, gamblers, drinkers and people who use sex products aren’t treated unequally with less rights. Gay people are.

You try being gay and on the receiving end of those messages and then come and tell us they’re not harmful.

Agree with you! It is heartening to see there are so many compassionate people willing to take a stand. I am glad you feel supported.

Nope. There is none. Abbott knows it too. That’s why he’s trying to make it about political correctness. Read this.

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/.....xu2j2.html

Great initiative! This helps to reinforce that everyone working in the ad industry has a choice.

Just because a client forks out money, doesn’t mean that we should be doing something that is against our individual values. There is always the choice to step away.

For those that may be interested. Check out what other laws have changed in Canada because of gay marriage. Among these laws ,children of gay couples will no longer be permitted to contact their “natural” parents, the term will be deleted in favour of legal parents.

And I’m voting No because I detest Penny Wong

Left lunacy!

Shouldn’t a professional be professional and not allow personal opinions to get in the way?

SMH. No surprises there. The voice of the left.

Supposed and self appointed moral high ground. All well to speak of acceptance, tolerance & diversity – just as long as you share the same opinion. Give me a break!

Just hope it works both ways too. That would be the right thing to do.

Is that legal? If not, it is certainly bigoted. If an ad agency refused to do ads for the yes campaign there would be hell to pay. It seems that the least tolerant are ones calling for tolerance.

Pete, the representatives that you speak of whom were elected by the population were in fact elected due to their party policy of opposing same sex marriage… do the facts pass you by when you’re dribbling your own ideologies? Ever heard of a democratic society? Because you do in fact live in one and if you don’t like the rules feel free to leave

You are asking us to be robots. We are not robots. Humanity will always influence our choices, as it should. So I want to ask you this:

Shouldn’t a human be human and not allow personal opinions to dictate how others live their life?

And more importantly, shouldn’t a priest be a priest and allow everybody to have the same rights?

Can’t believe you can’t see that it’s their business that they ARE minding. Putting human rights before commercial interests shows excellent business acumen. And regardless of business, why do you confuse politics with human rights and dignity?

Unless the client is gay and wants a cake and the baker is a Christian and it’s against his individual values?
Oh the hypocrisy!

Bad news
But it is ok
It means businesses can do the same to ppl who say yes
Just do not blame the baker nor wedding planners anymore

You missed my point.
If someone worked on the respect marriage campaign would that be a CEM?
What would the fallout be for an agency that did so?

From your answer, you’ve proven my point.

Will you be as supportive of individuals and businesses that desire their own right to exercise their conscience?
Or will you destroy them?

So will you accord the same right of refusal to individuals and businesses that do not want to violate their conscience?

Everyone’s opinion is welcome – no questioning that. What is not welcome is intentionally marginalising a group of people. A group of people who’s opinion in this matter has been so far completely ignored.

The gay community has been very tolerant of the straight community over the years, despite some terrible treatment. To my knowledge, the gay community has never stopped the straight community from living their lives the way want. Pity same can’t be said in reverse.

Sure, you can do this. Can a baker refuse to bake a wedding cake because he doesn’t like the job? Can a florist refuse to supply flowers to a wedding if they don’t like the job?

Be careful lest you appear as hypocrites and bullies. If you want to exercise the freedom to say no to a given task, you need to uphold the very same freedom to others.

In reality, the Governor General should sack this Prime Minister and there should be an election. The aforementioned topic could be voted for in Parliament, instead of this waste-of-money, cooked up Postal Vote.

The sad truth Australia is run by a group of incompetents that do not serve the wishes of the people.

We live in free country Ingmar, this includes advertising people,they are not involved in politics, this is about humanity,so I take it that you woyld have one if the people to support Hitler.

Andrew,stop hiding behind releigion,this is facisim,true Catholics are all loving,remember,as you judge,so shall you be judged.

There’s more to this than most people are aware. In Canada a school may be forced to close because it teaches bible passages that the LGBT community finds offensive.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/.....my-alberta

Tony Abbot can see this coming to Australia too. Freedom of expression is indeed under great threat. We should all be very concerned by this regardless of whether you are religious or not. Worrying times ahead!

Let’s call this out for what it really is. This is an attempt by some with loud voices in the ad industry to shut-down ‘No’ by boycotting, intimidating and attempting to silence or influence those that don’t agree or are undecided with their views on SSM. The creators of this mischievous and clever campaign also created the pro SMS “Its Only Fair” campaign earlier this year so it’s clear where they stand.

The fact is the majority of Australians want a plebiscite on SMS. Let them have their say. Aussies have been discussing SMS for years. To push for “Say No to No” by arguing that a No campaign and debate on SMS would unleash bigotry is backward and utter nonsense. It just doesn’t cut the wasabi!

If their conscience tells them I don’t deserve the same rights as them, I don’t see why I should be remotely concerned for their business.

The industry members are merely stating they won’t take the work, nothing more. They are not moralising, unlike either side of the campaign, which is where the moralising on the issue belongs. Any other excuse – anti-free speech, “won’t somebody think of the children”, political correctness etc. is a dog whistle to distract from the point: one section of the community is being asked to grant another section of the community THE SAME RIGHTS THEY ENJOY ALREADY. This is Australia, not 1930’s Germany nor present day USA.

Yay! Who doesn’t love censorship ?

Virtue signaling at its best. Instead – put your money where your mouth is and create a pro bono Yes campaign.

Ignoring the pile of obvious comments from people who want to continue to boycott gay people complaining when agencies boycott anti-gay organistions.

This is a positive move. Nice to see leadership from agency land on an issue that is important for both their customers, and their customers’ customers.

Man, the trolls are EVERYWHERE! Go home Blake.

To all the people typing left lunacy & left bullying, get a grip.

The same arguments were thrown around about inter-racial marriage. Ask anyone in 2017 if that is an “immoral” thing to do, this issue will be over as soon as it passes. Same sex marriage only affects you if you are
a. Gay
b. want to marry the same sex
Why the “Liberals” the party of small government & small business aren’t for it boggles the mind imagine the boost to the economy

I added this comment to a LinkedIn post about this issue – thought I’d share here as well…

Putting aside the political reasons for this unprecedented use of a non-binding, non-compulsory and costly postal survey to determine the equal rights of a part of our community – which could be done in Parliament today! (The High Court may well stop the survey – we’ll see).

The truth is a vocal minority supporting the no campaign know they cannot build a credible argument on the real reason to oppose a reversal of the marriage act – so they promote a range of irrelevant, misleading and inflammatory arguments which are damaging to the LGBTIQ community. This is where the admirable Say No to No campaign will have its greatest impact. Congratulations to The Guardian who also took a stand against misleading no campaign content.

We live in extraordinary, uncertain times – many of us are going to be confronted by that ‘line in the sand’ where it will be up to each of us to determine if we are willing to cross it & exactly what we’re willing to walk by. In years to come I know how I’d like to look back & think of the actions I took during these scary times.

Hopefully this is the start of a conversation we as an industry have on a range of business sectors, campaigns and media content. Interesting to note Sleeping Giants (which has had huge success in the US taking advertisers off sites such as Breitbart) launched in Australia over the weekend…

The only people who can legitimately claim the moral high ground here are the ones who have actually been asked and said no. The rest are really just playing with themselves but pretending they’re not alone.

Thanks Rachael – that’s my view on this too. It’s not about choosing whether you want to work on a controversial product. This is about human rights and equality. We’ve been asking pollies to go with a conscience vote so I don’t see why an industry can’t do the same.

And it is for THAT reason that I must vote no.
Today you’ll be taking away someone’s freedom of religion.
Tomorrow you’re taking away a right that I will need.

Just remember, the ONLY reason we’re having this debate is… you and many others have been free to exercise your right to conscience and speech.

They came for the Christian bakers, but I said nothing for I am not one of them.
They came for the alt-right nationalists, but I said nothing for I am not one of them.
They came for the minority members who refused to toe the narrative of oppressed victims, but I said nothing for I am not one of them.
They came for the centrists and libertarians who advocated for liberal ideals, but I said nothing for I am not one of them.
Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak.

I’ve signed and pledged for fear of being wrongly labelled a homophobe and bigot in my agency and the industry. Not sure how I’ll vote now. This form of intimidation and pressure has made me feel really uneasy.

Bullies!

Laws such as Bill 89 have also been introduced in Canada giving the government the legal right to remove children from parents who are not supportive of homosexuality

You have a very limited understanding of this issue. If only if were that simple. The ramifications of this are significant and go way beyond just SMS.

[Edited under Mumbrella’s comment moderation policy]. LOL. This is Orwellian.

Excellent contribution. Thank you. By the way, learn to write grammar correctly and put sentences together properly dimwit.

Literally no one is taking away your freedom of religion. You are still as welcome to practice your faith as ever, I am yet to see any reason why some other couple getting married should affect the way you live your life at all.

All of your examples are people who have never actually been oppressed, and are crying victim now that historically oppressed groups are demanding their rights. Other people having the same rights as you does not take away your rights in the slightest.

Help us understand. Now is your chance to explain it.

In all seriousness, what are the ramifications beyond same sex marriage?

Well I can only speak for myself and my partner, but we would not wish to consider giving our business and our money to such a person, though we would pity him.

What reasonable person could ‘hate Penny Wong’? I can put together lists of compelling, justifiable reasons why somebody might hate Abbott. Name one for Penny? Penny is one of the good people.

To all those that doubted, here is proof that the NO campaign did indeed resort to disgusting tactics. Huff Post reports this poster was allegedly linked to Neo-Nazis. So any of you sitting on the fence, please consider who you are aligning yourself with.

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/.....et/8828566

Organising a boycott of the case for traditional marriage. Charming.

Next: Kaufen nicht bei Juden!

How about some proof that this is not black propaganda?

If the whole country votes Yes & I vote NO, does that mean I’m wrong? So you say I’m homophobic, bigot , bias etc. why do you hate me

Yes and the yes camp keep asking how will gay people getting married affect straight people’s lives?! Give me a break… They’re the real bigots, they have pushed and pushed and pushed their agenda to the point where the government is distracted & not solving the country’s real problems & they claim mental trauma when anyone tries to explain the consequences because mental trauma comes from the realisation that you are wrong but you have no way to justify what you’re doing to make yourself feel better! By the way, every one does have equal rights – same-sex couples have every single right that despite facto hetero couples do & they actually can even get married, just have to marry the opposite sex as defined by marriage and to try to change the definition to suit them is like trying to redefine an orange as an apple!

This disgusts me to see. Since when did we become a communist country where the powers that be band together to stifle people’s opinions no matter what they are? How dare any media outlet or other behave this way you are just like school yard bullies shame on you all!!