Been in pubs like that.
1 Like
3 Likes
The hands are too large and I doubt they consulted Stormy Daniels upfront.
Lolzā¦ Could you imagine being like, āright screw that Iām cancelling my TVā because the owner likes a political party you donāt? (, Derogatory term removed by author)
I refused to buy sky for decades cause Murdoch and his his clan are first class tory cunts. Iāve also never bought a Sun for the same reason. If that makes me a ātardā, fucking hate that term, shockingly discriminating to people with learning disabilities, Iāll take it.
12 Likes
Same.
Yup, wonāt buy Sky because of Murdoch, heās such a piece of shit.
And if you ever use that term on here again, itās hammer time. No excuses.
Apologies for the term. Was written in too much haste. Have deleted.
To the other point, I think thereās a distinction between Murdoch, who is generally a morally reprehensible character, and someone who merely supports a political party you donāt like. I donāt believe thereās anything ābadā about Hastings generally. Unless of course supporting a party you donāt like makes you an immoral person; maybe Iām not politically engaged enough to care that much.
Thank you.
In the above case, Iām not about to start boycotting Netflix, but then thatās because I would be voting for Harris if I were a US citizen. Other companies over there (Chickfila and the MyPillow wanker) would be right on the list for deep seated support of Trump and other very cunty policies.
The more complicated ones are companies that invariably donate to both sides because they donāt care, they just want to make sure whoever wins owes them one.
He has had no connection to Sky Broadcasting or Sky News for some years. They are now owned by Comcast,
I now have a Sky subscription
1 Like
I guess itās subjective. Aside from something like the BNP, I donāt think thereās a party in the UK that I would boycott a company over their owner supporting, even though I may disagree strongly with that partyās policies.
Perhaps thereās also a difference in voicing support for a party and actively donating. I guess if I felt strongly about party, Iād object to my money being used to help fund it.
Donāt know if itās more complicated. A companyās purpose is to make money, not be political. You could probably argue theyāre being pragmatic for shareholders.
The number of big firms contracting lobbyists is ever growing here
1 Like
Thatās a slightly different thing to voicing support for a given party.
Either way, I wasnāt supporting the notion - just saying companies will do what they can to make money and we canāt expect any different. If we want to stop a practice then we need to impose regulation.
The point being made is that by giving money to companies with an āagendaā not aligned to your personal politics is A) Enabling B) low integrity. Companies soon sharpen up when their bottom line is affected.
Well, I wonāt buy a Tesla, because Musk. So 
Obviously Trump supporters are idiots 
But people are entitled to make their own choices about which companies they support for whatever reason.
Where figures in business are politically active itās legitimate to take their stance into account.
I work for a major national charity who spend a lot of time lobbying Government over health concerns.
Pushing support for the sugar tax, for CPR to be taught in schools etc.
They certainly donāt donate and would lobby any Government of any political persuasion, but the relationships certainly exist.
1 Like
The UK continues to mirror the US at every turn. Whilst there is of course positive lobbying and lobbyists when we look at the US and how industry literally and directly influences policy itās clear the line between politics and industry blew through a long time ago. (See Edward Bernays).
I refused to give SKY any money until the wrinkly old twat sold it all off.
I now have Sky Stream - itās shit shouldāve stuck with the Q box.
1 Like