No you didn’t

Would you turn down the request of your terminally ill grandfather?

Not sure it is worth wasting his energy trying to convince him not to read the mail…

Could have just said they didn’t have it…

Would have thought mail trains puns are on track ?
Bit before most people’s time

the night mail 1936

I went to buy the Daily Mail the other week at the last minute I couldn’t do it and got the Mirror instead .
Yes I did do this, it was a favour for a murder suspect in custody.

I live in a very stereotypically leafy and Tory rural Kent village, someone keeps moving all of the Daily Heils in our local Co-Op over to the bog roll shelf. Someone else keeps leaving copies of the Socialist Worker and Morning Star in the Daily Heil’s newspaper rack too.

I don’t know who keeps doing this, but even in the heart of anti-EU England there’s an increasing backlash against the Daily Heil ever since they went all Brexity. When I find out who the mystery saboteur is, they’ll be getting a few pints bought for them.

I had to buy a daily mail the other week *shudders*

Did you find a porn mag to hide it in?

I don’t know who keeps doing this

One of the staff surely? 😆 Fabulous though.

Jeremy Corbyn’s spokesman says Labour would lift Virgin’s Daily Mail ban after nationalisation: “There will be no bans on the publicly owned railway.”

HT @adambienkov

🙂

Sounds like JC’s spokesman doesn’t know the difference between “banned” and “dropped” either.

So Branson’s companies are models of virtue all of a sudden? What about his ‘licence to print money’ comment on the rail franchises? I don’t know who’s worse, Virgin Group or the Mail. At least the mail are honest about their views.

So Branson’s companies are models of virtue all of a sudden?

Yes, that’s exactly what everyone is saying. 🙄

What about his ‘licence to print money’ comment on the rail franchises?

Businessman and entrepreneur in “making money” shocker, film at 11. What about it? I don’t know the quote / story to which you refer.

I don’t know who’s worse, Virgin Group or the Mail.

Really?

Really?

I suppose that buying the Mail is entirely discretionary, whereas it is sometimes impossible to avoid using Virgin Rail’s laughable excuse of a service.

Branson the man is who is suing the NHS decides not to sell the mail on moral grounds…

It will have the opposite effect….only people who struggle with differing opinions want things banned, sad really.

There is a certain percentage of the population who just want to live in an echo chamber and genuinely seem unable to tolerate other views…which is odd as its this lot who usually bang on about tolerance etc…

…part of that ‘tolerance’ is living in a world where people are free to have right wing views, however unpalatable you may find them.

…part of that ‘tolerance’ is living in a world where people are free to have right wing views, however unpalatable you may find them.

…just as Virgin Rail is free to decide which newspapers to sell.

Virgin Trains’ decision to stop selling the Daily Mail on its West Coast services has been described as “absurd” and “pompous” by Boris Johnson
Really?

Boris should know, he’s the expert on that sort of thing.

Anyway. I’ve never read the Mail, and nor has my wife.

You seem confused deviant. Nobody is suggesting stopping people from having right wing views. Nobody is even banning the DM. It’s simply that it will no longer be sold in certain locations – in the same way Cycling Weekly and The Morning Star are already “banned” in those locations. At worst it’s deplatforming – the question is, do all opinions deserve a platform?

Good point though:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8464124.stm

I’m happy to read the Daily Mail, I draw the line at Cycling Weekly though. Though that is over a fundamental difference of spelling.

There is a certain percentage of the population who just want to live in an echo chamber and genuinely seem unable to tolerate other views..

Luckily for them, they’ll still be able to feed their fear and hate by reading the daily mail on Virgin Trains

aracer….you seem to be confusing me with some kind of islamaphobe ukip supporter….I’m neither, I’m simply an advocate of free speech…i wholeheartedly agree with and cherish the line by a philosopher that goes along the lines of:

Although I may despise what you have to say, I would defend to the death your right to say it.

God knows we seem to have forgotten that gem of common sense these days….with someone only having to suggest that they’re offended by something and the mob fixes it in their sights as the next thing that must be banned, no platformed, reported to the police etc…like I said, sad that society is now paralysed by a fear of causing offence, it has effectively stifled any meaningful debate about a vast range of topics.

It’s symbolic rather than anything else

it’s not even that, it’s a cynical PR move (unless that’s what you were implying?). This is a firm who’s moral code encompasses suing the NHS for millions to get lucrative contracts. As said above Virgin sell very few DMs (I heard 1 for every 4 trains on the West Coast line) so they are axing a poorly performing product. And they are currently fighting a PR battle about having their East Coast rail franchise bailed out with millions of taxpayers’ money.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/nov/29/east-coast-rail-franchise-terminated-three-years-early-virgin-trains

It will have the opposite effect….only people who struggle with differing opinions want things banned, sad really.

There is a certain percentage of the population who just want to live in an echo chamber and genuinely seem unable to tolerate other views

Sadly this is true, and why Virgin Trains think they can score moral points from dropping the DM.

Will they also block MailOnline on their Wifi?

God knows we seem to have forgotten that gem of common sense these days

I am not sure of the relevance here?
You need to get past the rubbish being spread by the rabid right.
The daily mail isnt being banned or censored.
Its not an infringement on their free speech.
They are simply not being sold/given away on Virgin trains.
Its really quite odd. Would have thought the rabid right would be defending a private business right to making their own business decisions rather than trying to force them to sell a particular product, probably at a loss.

Although I may despise what you have to say, I would defend to the death your right to say it.

You know, I don’t think I’d defend, to the death, deviant’s right to free speech.

I’d have a right good barney with someone over it, but to the point of physical harm or even death. Not a chance.

Nobody is even banning the DM.

Not on the railways at least. Meanwhile…

I thought most Wail readers focused on the online tittle tattle so hard to see what impact this has.

Agree with the above, this is just political agry-bargy.

Virgin are no saints, maybe bandson is butt hurt he didn’t get a private share of the NHS.

I’m not complaining they’ve chosen not to stock the daily fascist, but let’s see this for what it really is, which is political wrangling of private companies interfering with what should be politicaly neutral services.

deviant – Member
Although I may despise what you have to say, I would defend to the death your right to say it.

Well did you hear, there’s a natural order.
Those most deserving will end up with the most.
That the cream cannot help but always rise up to the top,
Well I say: Shit floats.
If you thought things had changed,
Friend you’d better think again,
Bluntly put in the fewest of words,
**** are still running the world,
**** are still running the world.

Now the working classes are obsolete,
They are surplus to societies needs,
So let ‘em all kill each other,
And get it made overseas.
That’s the word don’t you know,
From the guys thats running the show,
Lets be perfectly clear boys and girls,
**** are still running the world,
**** are still running the world.

Oh feed your children on Cray fish and Lobster tails,
Find a school near the top of the league,
In theory I respect your right to exist,
I will kill ya if you move in next to me,
Ah it stinks, it sucks, it’s anthropologically unjust,
But the takings are up by a third, Oh So
**** are still running the world,
**** are still running the world.

Your free market is perfectly natural,
Or do you think that I’m some kind of dummy,
It’s the ideal way to order the world,
**** the morals, does it make any money?
And if you don’t like it? Then leave.
Or use your right to protest on the street,
Yeah, use your rights but don’t imagine that it’s heard, Oh no no,
**** are still running the world,
**** are still running the world

No – but you do seem to be aligning yourself with Nige on this – he made the similar mistake of suggesting it is a ban.

Once again, not selling something is not a threat to free speech. Even deplatforming is not a threat to free speech – anybody is still free to get their soapbox stand on a street corner and say whatever they like. Or to publish whatever they like (though they might find if they do that we don’t have pure free speech in this country, you can be arrested for saying some things on your soap box or publishing them – which is a good thing IMHO). By not selling a publication or deplatforming, all you’re doing is not participating in the distribution of somebody’s opinions. Nobody has a right to make other people facilitate the spreading of their opinions.

Deplatforming (is that a word) by certain insistutions is wrong. Controversial people or opinions aren’t necessarily wrong and I disagree with universities deplatforming like Berkley did to Richard Dawkins or was attempted at Cardiff Uni on Germaine Greer.

It’s a race to virtue signal and to take offence at everything.

Virgin’s banning is a cynical PR stunt and feigned hatred of The Mail is getting a little embarrassing too.

Bizarrely, virgin group still advertises in the daily mail, according to SFH

As above Richard Branson and Virgin are masters at portraying their brand as occupying the moral highground when in reality they are not very nice people. I’m no fan on the Mail, mainly because of their use of clickbait and borderline pornographic photos on their website, but Branson did very well out of the Derek and Clive tapes as their producer and distributor. Jokes about domestic violence and sexual abuse on a fairly grand scale, it should be said, but if a less veneered figure than Sir Rich had produced them, I imagine they would be dredged up now as part of a character assassination.

It seems it is (though a hyphen may be more correct) – I googled in order to find the correct word. As I already pointed out, it’s not shutting down opinions, it’s simply not facilitating them. Do you think everybody is entitled to a platform, are there no views you think so abhorrent that speakers shouldn’t be extended an invite?

It’s a race to virtue signal and to take offence at everything.

Interesting use of terminology given your apparent views on free speech – like “snowflake” it’s terminology used to shut down debate.

Virgin’s banning is a cynical PR stunt and feigned hatred of The Mail is getting a little embarrassing too.

Apart from it not being a banning, you’re probably right on the first bit, but my dislike of the DM isn’t at all feigned, and I doubt it is for most people. You do realise it is possible to have liberal opinions which aren’t just for show?

You do realise it is possible to have liberal opinions which aren’t just for show?

Freedom of speech is usually core to liberal opinions. Celebrating deplatforming isn’t liberal.

It is a bit surreal though. Who the hell buys newspapers? How are they still a thing? Are town criers still available on virgin trains?

I’ve found that this comic from xkcd to be the best definition of what freedom of speech actually means as opposed to what people think it means. A bit American but still the point stands

https://xkcd.com/1357/

That is not to say however that I think all “controversial” speaker should be denied a platform to air their views as seems to happening at some universities.

As I keep pointing out, deplatforming isn’t a freedom of speech thing – anybody can get their soapbox out and proclaim their views in a public place. Providing a platform is effectively legitimising views.

Though it’s also possible to be a liberal and be comfortable with the lack of pure freedom of speech we have in this country – the evidence would suggest that despite stuff like Brexit we’re still more liberal as a country than the most obvious one which does have legally enshrined freedom of speech. It’s interesting that those most vehemently defending the right to freedom of speech tend not to be all that liberal.

edit: as usual xkcd says it much better than me

Actually I agree – deplatforming is something which needs to be used carefully and in some cases it’s gone too far. Fine as a principle though.

Though it’s also possible to be a liberal and be comfortable with the lack of pure freedom of speech we have in this country – the evidence would suggest that despite stuff like Brexit we’re still more liberal as a country than the most obvious one which does have legally enshrined freedom of speech. It’s interesting that those most vehemently defending the right to freedom of speech tend not to be all that liberal.

The best example against deplatforming was Nick Griffin on Question Time. That was the end of him.

It’s interesting that those most vehemently defending the right to freedom of speech tend not to be all that liberal.

Agree, it tends to be the racist, homophobic types who want their BS heard.

Anecdote != data.

How did providing Hitler with a platform work out?

How did providing Hitler with a platform work out?

Odd one. Are you suggesting that the government in power should deplatform political opponents?

Deplatforming Corbyn does appeal. He was endorsed by the Daily Stormer after all.