Today, I emailed a prominent organisation that visits schools to ask if they can rule out "any connection with a person or organisation who supports someone who’s abused children, committed a sexual offence, or committed perjury or another serious offence."
Yep.
(1/3)
@AnnaMcM
"Defenders of rubbish human behaviour love this version of free speech: irresponsible, unethical and individualistic. When other types of free speech are under attack - say by threats against libraries who want to host rainbow story time - well, they seem to lose interest."
https://theendisnaenae.substack.com/p/in-good-faith
Some might. Others are more consistent in their decent of their stated principles;
(2/3)
Having said that, for the sake of fairness and accuracy...
"If the council is correct, then the Free Speech Union doesn’t have a leg to stand on. Why are they bothering? I won’t speculate."
https://theendisnaenae.substack.com/p/in-good-faith
I will. This is marketing 101; all publicity is good publicity.
(3/3)
Marketers learned decades ago what The Algorithms on DataFarming platforms relearned. Which is that stuff that riles people up is just as sticky as stuff they think is fabulous, and much sticker than stuff that's merely good.
Suing the council over a situation that's legally simple, but ethically grey, is guaranteed to gets them media coverage. I mean, you wrote about it. From a marketer's PoV, that's mission accomplished.
AnnaMcMartin/The End is Naenae
Strypey