Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 19

Thread: An overreaction?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    373

    Default An overreaction?

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ImageViewer.jpg 
Views:	26 
Size:	23.3 KB 
ID:	35795

    A supermarket in Arkansas has reversed it’s decision to place a ‘family shield’ over the cover of the current issue of US weekly which features Elton John and David Furnish with their new baby Zachary.

    The move to censor the cover with a ‘family shield' - which is traditionally used to cover pornography - sparked outrage amongst civil rights groups, with representatives from GLAAD (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) investigating the issue.

    A spokesperson for Harps Grocery Stores initially defended the shield, saying Harps bosses reacted in response to 'several' customer complaints at that particular store.

    He insisted that the move was "in no way our opinion on this issue," adding "we do not have an opinion on this issue."

    The story hit the Internet after a customer, Jennifer Huddleston, took a photo of the shield and posted it on Plixi. "This was taken at my local grocery store," she wrote. "I was shocked and horrified."

    "They are saying they need to keep children from seeing it, because it is a gay family."

    Within hours of the photo hitting the Internet, Harps received a raft of complaints and removed the shield.

    What do you think? an over reaction by Harps or merely reacting to their customers needs?
    GL
    Last edited by Gaylord; 31-01-11 at 12:30.
    "Keep it real with me, and I'll keep it real with you"

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Gaylord For This Useful Post:

    OnlyMe (01-02-11)

  3. #2
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    At home
    Posts
    22,443

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaylord View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ImageViewer.jpg 
Views:	26 
Size:	23.3 KB 
ID:	35795

    A supermarket in Arkansas has reversed it’s decision to place a ‘family shield’ over the cover of the current issue of US weekly which features Elton John and David Furnish with their new baby Zachary.

    The move to censor the cover with a ‘family shield' - which is traditionally used to cover pornography - sparked outrage amongst civil rights groups, with representatives from GLAAD (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) investigating the issue.

    A spokesperson for Harps Grocery Stores initially defended the shield, saying Harps bosses reacted in response to 'several' customer complaints at that particular store.

    He insisted that the move was "in no way our opinion on this issue," adding "we do not have an opinion on this issue."

    The story hit the Internet after a customer, Jennifer Huddleston, took a photo of the shield and posted it on Plixi. "This was taken at my local grocery store," she wrote. "I was shocked and horrified."

    "They are saying they need to keep children from seeing it, because it is a gay family."

    Within hours of the photo hitting the Internet, Harps received a raft of complaints and removed the shield.

    What do you think? an over reaction by Harps or merely reacting to their customers needs?

    GL
    I would say that its a grocery store which relies heavely on its customers to survive
    If customers refuse to shop there because of this (No matter how insensitive it is) the owner has a right to do what he did.
    You just cant keep everyone happy
    Join the E-I Fantasy Football League

    http://www.escort-ireland.com/boards...ntasy-Football

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    1,199
    Reviews
    9

    Default

    So long as they are consistent.

    I mean, i imagine a lot of people would be offended by a picture of George Bush on the cover of a magazine, so I presume they would cover that as well.
    The Gods are just, and of our pleasant vices
    Make instruments to plague us

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    1,199
    Reviews
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doozer View Post
    I would say that its a grocery store which relies heavely on its customers to survive
    If customers refuse to shop there because of this (No matter how insensitive it is) the owner has a right to do what he did.
    You just cant keep everyone happy
    Some customers may refuse to shop there because of what he did, so there is not necessarily a commercial advantage.

    As to his rights to do as he did - hmmmmm, tricky one that. It could be argued that he acted against a minority, or worse.
    The Gods are just, and of our pleasant vices
    Make instruments to plague us

  6. #5
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    At home
    Posts
    22,443

    Default

    True but the minority were the ones voicing their complaint at the time so he would have to try and appease them
    Join the E-I Fantasy Football League

    http://www.escort-ireland.com/boards...ntasy-Football

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    1,199
    Reviews
    9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Doozer View Post
    True but the minority were the ones voicing their complaint at the time so he would have to try and appease them
    The squeakiest wheel gets the grease?

    In my opinion, this makes it worse.

    We have no reason to believe the majority of people has an issue with the magazine being on display. If the guy had some fundamental belief that displaying this image was wrong, I would have some respect for his position.
    The Gods are just, and of our pleasant vices
    Make instruments to plague us

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to scotus For This Useful Post:

    Gaylord (31-01-11)

  9. #7
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    At home
    Posts
    22,443

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scotus View Post
    The squeakiest wheel gets the grease?

    In my opinion, this makes it worse.

    We have no reason to believe the majority of people has an issue with the magazine being on display. If the guy had some fundamental belief that displaying this image was wrong, I would have some respect for his position.
    Yeah I know what you are saying. Im sure like most people he couldnt care less but some homophobic fundemental christians had a go at him ad to keep the peace and keep them consuming in his store he gave in. Way of teh world in these harsh times
    Join the E-I Fantasy Football League

    http://www.escort-ireland.com/boards...ntasy-Football

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Doozer For This Useful Post:

    Gaylord (31-01-11)

  11. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    854
    Reviews
    4

    Default

    Arkansas, like most other Southern states, is part of the Bible Belt and I would expect a reaction like this there. They're not very open minded.

  12. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Paranoia Dept.
    Posts
    2,325

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dark-knight View Post
    Arkansas, like most other Southern states, is part of the Bible Belt and I would expect a reaction like this there. They're not very open minded.
    you got that right- if that happened where I live here in the States, the store would be boycotted by people outraged at such a clear attack on same sex couples( & no I'm not in San Fran- just the liberal heart of the North east, the local UU Church has been marrying SS couples since the 60s).... Arkansas is the heart of the bible thumping hyprocrisyville- they're pro-life & pro-death penalty & pro-gun- go unravel that mess.
    I saw that mag at the check-out the other day & said to myself- only a matter of hours before the moral majority wankers get their teeth into that one-- sad thing is, in that state they're not exactly anything like a 'minority', fucking shitehawks

  13. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Paranoia Dept.
    Posts
    2,325

    Default

    was thinking about above & a few things struck me- I have some (modest) degree of sympathy with the merchant: when you operate in that environment you're going to be get flack from both sides. It's good to see that there was outrage, so even in the deep south things are changing. One small but subtle thing which is ( almost) uniquely American here.. there was no mention whatsoever of "banning" or boycotting the mag.. even the bigots in this country ( for most part) respect the freedom of speech!

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to Franken996 For This Useful Post:

    Gaylord (01-02-11)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •