Web outrage over Moir's Gately article sees ads pulled and record complaints

Posted by Helena Humphrey on October 19, 2009 at 1:02 PM

The storm of debate surrounding Daily Mail columnist Jan Moir's article "Why there was nothing 'natural' about Stephen Gately's death (amended to "A strange, lonely and troubling death" in the print edition) has culminated in big name brands removing their advertising from part of the paper's website, the Guardian has reported. Public outrage at Moir's questioning of the role Gately's lifestyle and sexuality played in his death was evident as thousands of comments flooded the website: By 3pm on the day of publication the article itself had attracted more than 500 comments and at last count (Monday 12.00pm) the total still rising to 1180. The article has also prompted a complaint to the Metropolitan police.

The sticking point in Moir's piece, clearly, is that she links Gately's death to his homosexuality: "Whatever the cause of death is, it is not, by any yardstick, a natural one. Let us be absolutely clear about this. All that has been established so far is that Stephen Gately was not murdered." She goes on to say that: "Under the carapace of glittering, hedonistic celebrity, the ooze of a very different and more dangerous lifestyle has seeped out for all to see." Perhaps she should have at least waited for the results of the post-mortem last Tuesday, which confirmed that the singer died of natural causes, precisely a pulmonary oedema - an accumulation of fluid on the lungs.

Adding further insult to injury, the article was published on the eve of the singer's funeral in Dublin. Stephen Fry and Derren Brown made their feelings known on the social networking site, Twitter, using their feeds to urge others to make formal complaints. Brown wrote, "complain where it matters", adding a link to the Press Complaints Commission website. Similarly, Fry tweeted: "I gather a repulsive nobody writing in a paper no one of any decency would be seen dead with has written something loathsome and inhumane. Disgusted with Daily Mail's Jan Moir? Complain where it matters. She breaches 1,3,5 & 12 of the code." With Brown and Fry's combined following of almost one million, complaints then poured in to the Press Complaints Commission at the fastest rate in its history, causing the website to go down for most of the afternoon, receiving 21,000 complaints since Friday- more in a single weekend than the regulator has received in total in the past five years.

Facebook was also instrumental in the action, and saw the creation of a page urging users to lobby brands featured on the page. Marks & Spencer were among the first to request that their advertising be removed from the page featuring the column and a spokesperson for the retailer stated that the company "does not tolerate any form of discrimination," - a sentiment echoed by Nestlé who said that the comments made by Moir were a breach of the Swiss company's code for "mutual respect and tolerance." The company reportedly contacted its media-buying agency MindShare to investigate having its ad removed, although the Daily Mail had already withdrawn all ads featured alongside the article, including those of BT and National Express - both of whom declined to comment.

In a further unusual step the Daily Mail then issued a statement from Moir, who has won a British Press Award, in which she struck out at the internet protests and rejected accusations that her article was homophobic. She also questioned how many of those complaining about her piece had read it through from beginning to end, stating that she had been the victim of "a heavily orchestrated internet campaign".

A moral victory for outraged web surfers, it is fair to say that at times, the reaction on the internet became disturbing, turning into a witch hunt as a false allegation that the Daily Mail had claimed Gately had been murdered by his partner surfaced and circulated on Twitter - leading to Moir's home address to be posted in response. The immediacy of the internet in reaching an audience is something the Mail appeared to have underestimated - and now that it has learnt the hard way, let's hope it is a mistake that they don't make again.

Source: Guardian