Back Of The Bus - Third Design Firm Refuses to Provide Service to Verboten
Credits: Another Regina Ad Agency, Verboten
My sincere apologies for the delay in getting back to you. We have run into a bit of a snag, and I wanted to raise that with you before we proceed any farther.
[Redacted] has come back to me and said they aren't able to work on your project. Freedom of speech is a wonderful goal and the team was very excited about helping you breathe life into your vision. Your brand positioning paper is clever and spot on in terms of where you want to take your company. However, some of the content on your site is not only controversial, it borders racism and casts unkind judgement without proof.
Even freedom of speech has limits when it crosses personal boundaries and is critical of or inhibits the rights of others as described in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
I have the greatest respect for you. You are a brilliant young man with a profound vision and the ability to bring it to life. My advice is to put some strict editorial controls in place and to use your tremendous passion further the good of humanity. Not to over quote a well-used phrase, but perception is reality, and in the world of strategic communication management that's our starting point. You don't want to launch your beautiful dream under a shroud of negativity, and I know you believe, as I do, that although you can't see, feel or touch it, negative energy is real and it can hurt your business.
I'm afraid without these safeguards in place and demonstrating that you are operating on the moral high ground it will be difficult to find the help you need.Our Response
I appreciate you trying. I do have strict editorial controls to follow up on your quote "However, some of the content on your site is not only controversial, it borders racism and casts unkind judgement without proof".
Can you please cite some actual examples of racism or is the accusation just being used spuriously to smear my work and grant a convenient exit for the supplier?
"Even freedom of speech has limits when it crosses personal boundaries and is critical of or inhibits the rights of others as described in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms." Are you suggesting criticism of real people is prohibited? Are you suggesting that my words promote hate or violence against an individual simply by being critical? Exactly when does my protection to speak apply? When it doesn't matter and everyone loves my point of view?
I am very careful to follow the guidance of sections 318, 319, and 320 of the Criminal Code of Canada and its well known that accusing someone of racism is just a trigger friendly way to shut down debate. I have no issue with any race, but if a group uses their racial heritage to further political goals I will challenge them on that as I challenge white supremacists or anyone else hiding behind identity politics.
Any judgments of actual people are clearly expressed as opinion and within context and only about those who have chosen to play in the public arena or profit from it so please cite actual examples of the hate speech I am allegedly publishing? Or is the act of criticism itself the problem.
Am I only free to say nice things? Am I only free to promote someones approved agenda?
I thought this was a free country? I am a patriot, I oppose violence, I support pluralism and equal rights, so why don't I seem to have any?Follow Up
Here's an example of pushing it too far.Name Calling
I get freedom of speech, and I am also keenly aware of what will sit well with your audience and what won't. You can defend the article, but the vast majority of people, while believing in free enterprise and the right to make a profit, are also sensitive to anything that leans toward criticism of one person based on their religious beliefs and inability to stand down a bully. It's not part of some cultures to do that, and I daresay it's not part of our culture. To say that she will benefit financially is stretching it, but to call her weak because she didn't stand up for herself will not be perceived as you intended.
I worry for this kind of content because it is a barrier to you achieving your vision, which is a truly exciting one and you have so very much to give.
I hope this helps.Follow Up Response
I can appreciate that the topic is provocative and the issue complicated, but this is a critical example of the type of articles we will be doing regularly. Be patient, we go after right wingers and their absurdity, too.
It contains all the elements we are after. A ginned up victim who wasn't really hurt, a "sky is falling" overreaction from professional SJW that causes real harm, that's the ginned up part, and sets up the argument about incitement later on. She could have done what anyone sensible does everyday, move on, tomorrow will be a better day. Bullying is bad, but it's not as bad as cowardliness or exploitation.
As to the angle that she will be trapped in Islam, where she will never be equal to a man and will never truly benefit from the doors that western school might otherwise have opened for her. That is both sad and true. This is an opinion I am "allowed" to hold am I not? Details matter right?
I want to make it clear, I only allow content on people in the public space. The girl in the Nameless article chose to face cameras for her own personal gain. Endlessly getting famous by making people aware of a problem is not an effective solution, neither do I support or respect that approach. We have real problems, and energy needs to be spent on their solutions, not their fund-raising posters.
If you want us to know you stopped by, visit our featured content and we get a little bit of ad revenue.Current Feature
These are posts distributed for broader viewership; could be anything from our catalogue past or present. Will open in a new tab.