Virgin Trains decision to stop selling Daily Mail, subsequently reversed

[whole diary]

[Red Squirrel]

.........and some are just plain hypocritical (........are they still stocking the Guardian, for now?) 

I think this is a reasonably good example of the false equivalence fallacy.

I'm not suggesting equivalence between the Graun and the Mail, I was merely speculating as to whether Virgin would now stock the Guardian as it (along with many others) printed a story about Beardie investing in the tourist economy of one of the most brutal and repressive regimes on the planet. Widely published elsewhere - it's the hypocrisy that's the issue - some may consider that the antics of the Saudi regime are mildly more distasteful than the front page of the Daily Mail, especially in its treatment of LGBT folks in this context, but naturally views will widely differ.

I wasn't suggesting you were. I was referring to the false equivalence between Virgin's approach to the Mail, and the Guardian's Branson story.

...a cartoon in one of his newspapers that likened a chimpanzee to President Obama?

...........why, not even the Mail would stoop that low! 

Really? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_McMurtry

[TaplowGreen]

.........and some are just plain hypocritical (........are they still stocking the Guardian, for now?) 

I think this is a reasonably good example of the false equivalence fallacy.

I'm not suggesting equivalence between the Graun and the Mail, I was merely speculating as to whether Virgin would now stock the Guardian as it (along with many others) printed a story about Beardie investing in the tourist economy of one of the most brutal and repressive regimes on the planet. Widely published elsewhere - it's the hypocrisy that's the issue - some may consider that the antics of the Saudi regime are mildly more distasteful than the front page of the Daily Mail, especially in its treatment of LGBT folks in this context, but naturally views will widely differ.

I wasn't suggesting you were. I was referring to the false equivalence between Virgin's approach to the Mail, and the Guardian's Branson story.

...a cartoon in one of his newspapers that likened a chimpanzee to President Obama?

...........why, not even the Mail would stoop that low! 

Really? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_McMurtry

You've got me there with your second point -  clearly Murdoch and the Mail are as bad as each other.............one might almost say they have equivalence!   

Still think there's a bit of a paradox in a company citing its "brand and beliefs" as a reason for not stocking a mainstream newspaper, whilst cheerfully investing in the economy of one of the most brutal and repressive regimes on the planet however? Especially in the LGBT context.

I think the overarching point is that Businesses need to exercise care in setting themselves up as paragons of virtue and righteousness when they have so much easily identifiable dirty washing in their own cupboards.........and that's even before we move onto certain companies who have been suing the NHS..............

[JayMac]

The next step has been taken.



 

[Timmer]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/virgin-trains-daily-mail-richard-branson-twitter-newspapers-sell-policy-a8159446.html

Well that lasted along time didn't it 

[TaplowGreen]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/virgin-trains-daily-mail-richard-branson-twitter-newspapers-sell-policy-a8159446.html

Well that lasted along time didn't it 

".....Freedom of speech, freedom of choice and tolerance for differing views are the core principles of any free and open society. While Virgin Trains has always said that their passengers are free to read whatever newspaper they choose on board West Coast trains, it is clear that on this occasion the decision to no longer sell the Mail has not been seen to live up to these principles.”

Whilst I would not read the Mail if you paid me, it's gratifying that Beardie has acknowledged his error and reversed his position.

Problems with (virtue) signalling affecting Virgin Trains have been resolved and normal service has been restored 

[Chris from Nailsea]

Interestingly, neither Sir Richard Branson nor Sir Brian Souter were involved in the original decision to cease sales of the Daily Mail.  From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

Virgin Trains to resume Daily Mail sales

Virgin Trains is to reverse its decision to stop selling the Daily Mail on its West Coast services.

Virgin Group boss Sir Richard Branson said he instructed the firm to restock the paper while a review takes place.

Virgin Trains had said the decision came after "feedback from our people". But Sir Richard said he was unaware of the move and the operator must never be seen to be "censoring" customers.

The Daily Mail said it welcomed the "support for freedom of speech".

In November, Virgin Trains staff were told in an internal memo "considerable concern" had been raised about the Mail's position on issues such as immigration, LGBT rights and unemployment.  The memo added the paper was "not compatible" with the company's beliefs.

Last week, Virgin said it regularly reviewed its on-board products and it had never sold the newspaper on its East Coast trains, which is under the management of Virgin and Stagecoach.  Virgin West Coast services run between London, the Midlands, the north-west of England and Scotland.

In Sir Richard's statement, he said the chairman of Stagecoach, Sir Brian Souter, was also not aware of the decision.  "Brian and I agree that we must not ever be seen to be censoring what our customers read and influencing their freedom of choice.  Nor must we be seen to be moralising on behalf of others. Instead we should stand up for the values we hold dear and defend them publicly, as I have done with the Mail on many issues over the years."

Sir Richard added a full review of Virgin Trains' sales policy would be carried out but this should not "single out individual media titles".

A Daily Mail spokesman said it welcomed the "support for freedom of speech, which is a cornerstone of our democracy, and his decision to instruct Virgin Trains to restock the Mail.  "We are sure the many Mail readers who travel on Virgin Trains will be delighted."

The paper described the original decision as "disgraceful" and suggested it had been taken for "political reasons".  It had said it "may be no coincidence" the other titles remaining in stock were "like Virgin owner Sir Richard Branson... pro-Remain".  The Mail had taken the opposite stance during the EU^» (European Union - about) referendum.

The decision by Virgin Trains had also attracted criticism from Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, who described it as "censorious and wrong".

When asked about the issue, both a Downing Street source and Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn said they backed a free press, while noting the choice of products sold by Virgin Trains was a decision for the company.

[JayMac]

,it's gratifying that Beardie has acknowledged his error and reversed his position.

Not his error. The 'error' was on the part of more principled managers, with a better moral compass, at Virgin Trains.

[TaplowGreen]

,it's gratifying that Beardie has acknowledged his error and reversed his position.

Not his error. The 'error' was on the part of more principled managers, with a better moral compass, at Virgin Trains.

Accountability, unlike responsibility, cannot be delegated I'm afraid..........hence Branson personally intervening now and reaffirming his Company's commitment to the principles of freedom of speech, choice and tolerance.

If we ever get to a stage in this Country where these parameters are decided by the subjective "moral compass" of a few middle managers, then it's not the society that our forefathers fought for.

.............I never thought I'd find myself agreeing with Jeremy Corbyn, I'd better go and have a lie down!

[Red Squirrel]

The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.

Schenck v. United States

[JayMac]