Beehaw
  • Communities
  • Create Post
  • search
    Search
  • Login
  • Sign Up
Blaze ( Blaze@piefed.zip )  to Privacy@programming.devEnglish · 8 months ago

The Mullvad ad that was banned in the UK

media.mullvad.net

external-link
message-square
12
link
fedilink
  • cross-posted to:
  • privacy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
113
external-link

The Mullvad ad that was banned in the UK

media.mullvad.net

Blaze ( Blaze@piefed.zip )  to Privacy@programming.devEnglish · 8 months ago
message-square
12
link
fedilink
  • cross-posted to:
  • privacy@lemmy.dbzer0.com

https://mullvad.net/en/and-then/uk

alert-triangle
You must log in or # to comment.
  • myrmidex ( myrmidex@belgae.social ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    8 months ago

    So while grok is spitting out underage nudes, THIS is what the UK bans? Can they suck Satan’s cock harder still?

    • doleo ( doleo@lemmy.one ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      Both can and will

    • rogsson ( rogsson@piefed.social ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      8 months ago

      Nomnomnom satans cock is delicious

    • ohulancutash ( ohulancutash@feddit.uk ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Political advertising is banned on TV and radio.

  • Funky_Beak ( Funky_Beak@lemmy.sdf.org ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    8 months ago

    It wasnt banned. They didnt meet the advertisment requirments. Its false outrage to generate clicks. Its quite disappointing of them thought they knew better.

    • BatmanAoD ( BatmanAoD@programming.dev ) 
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      8 months ago

      Aren’t advertising requirements that constrain subject matter effectively a mechanism for banning content?

      One of the reasons given for rejection was:

      Referencing topics such as: Paedophiles, Rapists, Murderers, Enemies of the state, Journalists, Refugees, Controversial opinions, People’s bedrooms, Police officers, Children’s headsets … is inappropriate and irrelevant to the average consumer’s experience with a VPN.

      That doesn’t seem to me like the sort of criteria that a rule-enforcement agency should be using for determining whether something should air. (For what it’s worth, refusing to air this in the US would absolutely be considered a freedom of speech issue.)

      • Funky_Beak ( Funky_Beak@lemmy.sdf.org ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        Did every one forget that uk was a aristocracy with democracy taked on? Point is they knew the requirments worked outside to get it banned and then generated false outrage.

        • BatmanAoD ( BatmanAoD@programming.dev ) 
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 months ago

          What does that have to do with anything?

    • Corbin ( Corbin@programming.dev ) 
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 months ago

      It isn’t the first time that the advertising requirements were used to chill speech. It doesn’t matter whether there was a ban; what matters is whether speech was effectively prevented. “There is no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.”

      • Funky_Beak ( Funky_Beak@lemmy.sdf.org ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Wouldnt surprise me that it was. Its what its likely designed to do. Doesnt mean mullvad werent aware of it and took advantage in a dishonest way

  • ulterno ( ulterno@programming.dev ) 
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    8 months ago

    Just checked the video and…
    Oof! That’s pretty much a political awareness video and far from an ad.

    There is no way they can risk mass political awareness regarding the new legislations that they are frantically attempting to tunnel through.
    100% ban material.


    If I were UK govt. I would be internally calling this a “National Security” issue.

  • SillyDude ( SillyDude@lemmy.zip ) 
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    And then and then and then

Privacy@programming.dev

privacy@programming.dev

Subscribe from Remote Instance

Create a post
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !privacy@programming.dev

Icon base by Lorc under CC BY 3.0 with modifications to add a gradient

Visibility: Public
globe

This community can be federated to other instances and be posted/commented in by their users.

  • 83 users / day
  • 604 users / week
  • 1.23K users / month
  • 3.88K users / 6 months
  • 34 local subscribers
  • 5.32K subscribers
  • 1.93K Posts
  • 6.99K Comments
  • Modlog
  • mods:
  • Ategon ( Ategon@programming.dev ) 
  • danielintempesta ( danielintempesta@programming.dev ) 
  • BE: 0.19.15
  • Modlog
  • Legal
  • Instances
  • Docs
  • Code