ad: Annual 2024 Now Open For Entries!
*

Opinions - Bus stop. Public transport, free speech and the battle for sexual choice.

Published

by Magnus Shaw

 

*When I was a kid, homosexuality bemused and troubled us. I went to a public school and, despite the stereotypes, any boy even hinting at same sex attraction would be inviting ridicule or worse. That's how stupid we were.
Now in middle-age, it's pleasing to note my own kids are much more relaxed. They know gay people, they are fans of gay celebrities and are not at all anxious about the sexual preferences of others. In a generation, the gay rights movement has made enormous progress but total acceptance is not yet a reality - as the recent fuss about two bus banner campaigns shows.

First, in the midst of the debate on gay marriage, Stonewall launched a mobile banner sporting the strapline "SOME PEOPLE ARE GAY, GET OVER IT."

I like the line. It's powerful and unapologetic, making its point with a vernacular flourish. Granted, it's more likely to be provocative than to convert objectors but it puts the message front and centre. As gay marriage slid down the news agenda so too did the prominence of the campaign, and that would have been the end of the story had a retaliatory bus ad not then appeared.

Published by Core Issues Trust & Anglican Mainstream, the new execution was almost identical in font and colour but now the strap read "NOT GAY! EX-GAY, POST-GAY AND PROUD. GET OVER IT."

Core Issues Trust describes itself as "a non-profit Christian initiative seeking to support men and women with homosexual issues who voluntarily seek change in sexual preference and expression. It respects the rights of individuals who identify as 'gay' who do not seek change."

The little disclaimer is slightly undermined by a biblical quote about 'sin' on the masthead of their website and a horribly garbled statement: 'God's Heart In Sexual and Relational Brokenness.'

Essentially, the group seeks to deploy religion to steer gay people towards a heterosexual lifestyle.

Whether this is even possible, through spiritual or any other means, is doubtful - but it's the organisation's use of advertising that concerns us here. The Core Issues (CI) advertisements were revealed in the prelude to the London mayoral elections and were rapidly and forcibly withdrawn by the incumbent Boris Johnson. Now Boris's motivations may have been entirely munificent, but I feel sure the 350,000 votes of the metropolitan gay community featured in his decision too.

Whatever his intentions, I actually think he was wrong. Legislation to prevent the distribution of 'hate' material, liable to incite violence or encourage harassment, has been in place for some time. This is a necessary safeguard as advertising's ability to persuade and influence must be kept from the maniacs and monsters. This is balanced by our right to free speech. If a message is merely promoting a point of view without coercion or threat, it should stand. To me, the CI ad is on the acceptable side of this line.

Personally I find the group's activities unhelpful, confused and even a bit silly - but that is no reason to deny them the right to spend their own money on their own advertising to express their rather archaic views. I don't actually believe CI do respect the rights of those who wish to 'remain' gay and assume they would prefer there was no homosexuality at all. But if I hadn't been exposed to their thinking I'd never have had the opportunity to reach that conclusion. That's how free speech works - you are given the chance to say whatever's on your mind, then I am at liberty to say why I disagree.

In fact, this would have been a strong and valid argument from CI when they objected to the blackout. Instead they walked into trouble by arguing the ad had been cleared by the ASA, which it hadn't:

"Following widespread news coverage of a planned advertising campaign by Anglican Mainstream and Core Issues, the ASA would like to reiterate that it is not involved in the pre-clearance or vetting of any advertisement, including this campaign."

Of course, when their tiny campaign (100 displays over two weeks) was outlawed, CI enjoyed more publicity than they ever expected - it's the Frankie Goes To Hollywood effect and another reason censorship is so problematic.

I'd rather CI had not run their campaign, but I would not seek to deny them access to advertising media. Advertising is part of an open and democratic society - not a forum for debate but still a totem of free speech. At its best advertising is creative, artistic and fun, but occasionally it pushes views which are considered negative, objectionable or wrong. To enjoy advertising's benefits we have to accept both, or we're likely to find we too are silenced by bureaucrats with vested interests.

As long as our public communications are legal and non-violent, we are entitled to express ourselves. Whether we write blogs, create advertisements, make films or sing songs, that is our immutable human right - however misguided the messages might be.

 

Magnus Shaw is a copywriter, blogger and consultant.

Visit Magnus Shaw's website
www,creativepool.co.uk/magnusshaw
"ADVICE" a collection of Magnus Shaw's columns is now available as a Kindle book.
 


 

Comments

More Workshop

*

Workshop

Obsessing over the Story with Wardour #CompanySpotlight

This week, we sat down with Martin MacConnol, Founder and CEO at the Covent Garden-based creative agency Wardour. How was your company born and where are you based? We began life as a content marketing agency on Wardour Street, Soho, in 1996 - the...

Posted by: Creativepool Editorial
*

Workshop

The anxiety attacking earplugs #CreativeCaseStudy

Design agency Matter has collaborated with University of the Arts London to develop a concept for a bio-inspired sustainable earplug using the natural form of a helix to reduce material needed to efficiently block out sound. The concept takes...

Posted by: Benjamin Hiorns
ad: Annual 2024 Now Open For Entries!