www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-12135540
Oh good grief. Another jobsworth hits the headlines. Why can't we make a laughing stock of people who do things like this, and make them realise how ridiculous and petty they are? I suppose they'd have to have therapy afterwards though. We might hurt their fluffy pink little feelings. We'd probably be thrown in the chokey for a hate crime. Oh good grief.
John
|
|
And now Keith Prowse is really grumpy.
|
Fascinating.
"Misuse of that emblem - even when done in an innocent and light-hearted manner - has to be addressed. Repeated and widespread misuse of the Red Cross emblem could dilute its neutrality and its ability to protect."
I fail to see how having a nurse in a panto wearing a red cross could dilute the neutrality of the Red Cross and its ability to protect.
However, this seems to me to be basically about protecting a trade mark. And pretty well all owners of trade marks seem to be very eager to go after anyone who they think is infringing it.
I must confess that notwithstanding all the good which the Red Cross do, this would tend to make me somewhat less likely to want to make a donation.
|
>>..this would tend to make me somewhat less likely to want to make a donation.>>
Perhaps if it stopped its present staggering level of advertising for donations I'd be more inclined.
But preference is still to support my local, equally critical charities, especially those such as the hospices.
|
|
Good job she didn't wear the Red Crescent emblem - she'd have had a fatwah as well as Mr Jobsworth to contend with.
|
And then you could shout "look out behind you!".
John
|
>> And then you could shout "look out behind you!".
>> John
>>
Oh no you wouldn't.
|
|
More than enough of our taxes go in foreign aid, local charities for me too.
|
Its a little more than a trade mark. It use is actually laid down in the Geneva Conventions Act 1957 as are various other marks including the red crescent.
relevant paras:
6. Use of Red Cross and other emblems. — (1) Subject to the provisions of this section, it shall not be lawful for any person, without the authority of the [F14Secretary of State], to use for any purpose whatsoever any of the following F15. . .; that is to say—
(a)
the emblem of a red cross with vertical and horizontal arms of the same length on, and completely surrounded by, a white ground, or the designation “Red Cross" or “Geneva Cross";
(b)
the emblem of a red crescent moon on, and completely surrounded by, a white ground, or the designation “Red Crescent";
|
This is surely just a distraction story - someone's trying to cover up the hiring of that offensive, unfunny old soak featuring in the centre of the promotional poster.
And yes, I have met him - The Cannon in Sunninghill, as many others of this neighbourhood will attest, was his regualr watering hole many years ago.
|
>> ...that offensive, unfunny old soak...
Agreed wholeheartedly. He's always appeared (to me) to be a mean-spirited bigot who just happened to strike it lucky. Made Bernard Manning look passable....
|
|
Interestingly, if you Google 'nurse outfit' (don't blame me for the images) they mostly have a white cross on a red background, even the kids one from Argos.
|
|
Clearly Argos are wise enough not to mess with the BRC.
|
|
Wonder why they don't treat it as free advertising? Heck of a lot cheaper than what they have done the last goodness knows how many Christmases - sent me a pack containing half a dozen Christmas cards, 100 name and address labels and a dozen "present labels" and then asked me for a donation in return. I sent them all back several years ago saying I didn't want their "free gifts" and they shouldn't send me any more - I would donate when I felt like it. Had no effect, I still get them and, I'm afraid, they go straight through the shredder. Local charities like hospices, and a couple of others (Lifeboats etc )get my money - and a couple of really nice Big Issue sellers near us, oh and don't forget that bloke in a nearby city who does a pretty good imitation of BB King on the guitar!! Too many big charities are over politicised these days and get too much Gov support - Private Eye did an article on it a while ago, "charities" that get milllions of taxpayer money and have chief execs paid hundreds of thoiusands per year.
|
|
I used to give top the Red Cross on a monthly dd. Why did I stop? Because I got fed up with them pestering me to increase the dd after every humanitarian disaster. I pick causes to support on a case by case basis now.
|
|
They all do that, A... That's why we cancelled my youngest daughters one to some whale and dolphin trust... we got fed up with the requests to increase... I wonder just how many people they lose because of that...
|
Seems perfectly reasonable to me. If they turn a blind eye to that where does it stop? It's a symbol with a reserved purpose.
It was a standard letter. The only thing I would have done differently would have been to phone the theatre manager first and explain the position, telling him that I would be sending the standard letter anyway formally to reserve the rights.
No jobsworth about it. Just due diligence.
|
So why haven't they done it before? Look back at many years of Pantos, videos (including the more racy types!), etc. Its been going on for years, why just start now?
I agree with other posters, I won't be sending any money to them if that how they choose to use it...
|
|
I think the point is that their attention was drawn to it. To ignore it after that implies consent. You can only turn a blind eye until somebody points it out.
|
Sense of humour? Not round here. - Crankcase
