Yesterday we received a number of angry tweets, e-mails and phone calls about a design from one of our shop partner’s shops. They all, in one form or another, asked the same question: why/how could you allow such a design to be sold or printed.
Yes, we know about this design – it has been available since 2008. We now know the terrible events it indirectly references. But, we see ourselves as a (neutral) platform – a “technical service”. That means that we sometimes have to print designs and text that we personally don’t support and/or don’t approve of – but still have to tolerate. As stated in this shop, “The Shop Partner is exclusively and solely responsible for the design and content of this shop”.
Whenever there is a design that might cross a line (something that is very difficult to define), the Ethics Committee steps in. This committee is made up of 7 employees from a number of departments throughout our company. They discuss shops and designs that have come to our attention on a case to case basis. For example, a “clean” shop with a design that clearly violates our ethical guidelines will not be shut down – simply the design would be removed.
There are however (often) situations where a design doesn’t directly violate our guidelines, but is rather a subtle case which lands somewhere in the grey zone between freedom of speech and censorship.
The example referenced above: a design “Without Killing Anyone”, is seen by many to be offensive, tasteless and disrespectful (I count myself among those). However, we have not yet removed it because it is a case that we have to review whether it falls within the realm of freedom of speech. We see this freedom as a fundamental part our platform – and unless a design directly violates the law or our ethical guidelines, we will not play the role of censor.
We will, however, review this design in our Ethics Committee. In the meanwhile, we invite you to express your opinions and thoughts for discussion in the comments below.
—–
UPDATE: We understand your points in the comments below. We take this and other such inquiries about ethics very seriously. We also want you to understand that this process takes time. Our platform allows users to upload content expressing their opinions. In some cases it is very clear that a design “allude[s] to victims of catastrophes or attacks in a disrespectful manner”, in other cases, like this one, when taken out of context, the design does not clearly break our ethical guidelines. This is why it was approved over 2 years ago and has existed on our platform without much note until yesterday afternoon.
We cannot control the opinions expressed in every design uploaded to our platform. Nor do we want to censor the opinions of our partners. I hope you understand that wish. Imagine you uploaded a design to our platform expressing an opinion we don’t agree with and us censoring it. This is why we let all designs uploaded to shops appear, as long as they clearly do not break any law or violate our ethical guidelines. This design violates the latter – but our Ethics Committee is in place to deal with this once it comes to our attention.
The Ethics Committee has decided to remove this design from the shop. Please understand that this process takes time and that we can’t remove every design complained about without properly looking into the case and coming to the right conclusion according to our Ethical Guidelines. After reviewing this design and placing it into the context (which was unclear two years ago upon its approval), we found it does violate our ethics.
Thank you for all of your comments expressing your outrage. I took each and every one seriously, except for those that personally threatened me. Please continue to discuss or ask questions below.
What a stupid answer! Ur just being ignorant and disrespectfull!
Before the t-shirt debate even rages in my mind, may I just point out that the t-shirt isn’t even accurate. Liverpool host the Heysel final so the implication is false. As if anyone should even justify the shirt.
I suppose it’s only a lot like making a shirt with 7 stars on with the slogan ‘Before it could be bought’.
Food for thought.
@Garret, as stated above, once we were made aware of the association to this tragedy were we able to deal with the design and start the process of deactivation after our Ethics Committee reviewed it.
You are right, a 9-11 design would most likely have been clear from the start and would not have been approved in the first place. In this case however, the design was approved out of context with no clear specific reference to the tragedy that we could associate the two. If we had been able to associate the design with the tragedy at that point, none of this would have happened.
Mark, your comment is much appreciated. I am glad this is behind us and the correct decision was made.
As hard as it is relating context to every design uploaded in order to avoid any ethical violations, we try our best to provide partners a place to express their opinions while still honouring our moral responsibilities.
That means that sometimes things like this will slip through, despite our best efforts. We rely on the online community to inform us where we have failed to relate possible ethics violations to our designs. In the end, this is what happened (albeit with a lot of heated personal rants), but again, the right thing was done.
Thanks to you and those that understand 🙂
Absoltely shameful …
I’m not sure which I consider worse, the original offending design or the subsequent bullsh1t which you have posted above about your ethics committee. As correctly pointed out already, if this was something about 9/11 for example, it would not have lasted a single minute !
Completely disassociate yourselves from websites and those producing such offending materials, with a public statement to support your disassociation, otherwise your just as bad as them !
Garrett
Dave,
Appreciate your direct response and the update provided.
It is an emotive issue – and you seem justifiably against the design yourself.
Appreciate you taking the matter into consideration and the outcome you reached. I can understand that these things can take time.
Take nothing personal from the responses you got. As I say – it’s an emotive issue and a shame that it even has to be addressed. I hope, if there is a lesson to be learnt – that it may be that your ethics committee catches such designs before they are issued so that attention of this nature does not need to be drawn to such items again.
All the best.
Hi there, came on here after the e mail was sent too me and I’d phoned Spreadshirt. Very pleased to see you’re taking the shirts down.
The correct decision. Thanks for all of your time.
Good decision – credit to you.
Thank you for removing this disgusting design.
disgusting.
Thank you, this is a sensible decision.
So, all – see the update in the post above. The Ethics Committee has come to a decision to remove the design – please take the time to read our response in the update. Thank you.
United fans only realised they felt strongly about Heysel after we started “we won it 5 times” after Istanbul.
So just stop pretending that this is born out of any moral outrage. It’s not. It’s just another way to have a go back.
Except you think it’s fine to do it as a point scoring exercise even though 39 people died.
Myth 1:
Liverpool never apologised. They did, pretty much on a yearly basis.
Myth 2:
Liverpool fans never acknowledged they had any part to play. We did. Half those who went to court were from Merseyside, it would have been pointless pretending otherwise, and nobody did. John Smith did say there were fans of other clubs there. There might well have been, but it was clear on the tv that many of the fans crossing the barriers had Liverpool tops on, so he shouldn’t have tried to shirk the blame.
Myth 3:
This t-shirt is just to remind those scousers of what they did back then.
Bollocks. It’s a cheap way to have a go.
Myth 4:
“Without killing anyone”
Tell that to Paul Nixon’s family. Or should we have “without killing anyone, we won it [FA Cup] 7 times”?
It’s pathetic, you’re pathetic.
If you feel strongly about it, go to Turin on the 29th May with one of your t-shirts on and see how you get on. I’m sure you’d feel really confident of your moral position to be able to explain it to a Juve fan.
Does not the news media make a profit either directly or indirectly (through advert revenue) from human tragedy every day?
Isn’t freedom of speech only relevant in terms of unpopular speech? Nobody needs to defend the words we all want to hear.
Seriously, some people have a lot to learn about freedom.
Disgrace, your in direct contradiction of your own policies on ‘ethics’. I’d like to see anyone whos either bought or condones the wearing of this piece of s*it to wear one to Anfield next season, or Liverpool in general. If its really not that offensive or inflammatory then that shouldnt be a problem.
Seriously guys, this is shameful. If selling this freely is a fundamental part of your platform, then your platform stinks.
I’ve had wanks that have produced more gifted t-shirt designers.
To quote you ‘it has been available since 2008’
Letting the design be sold unchallenged for up to 3 and a half years is turning a blind eye.
At the very least it is very poor quality control when it comes to vetting a shops content
At most it is actively profiting from the deaths of people.
Doesn’t look good from a commercial standpoint does it?
Dave, in reply to your comment, what “discussion” is needed? There is a simple remedy – remove the shirt. What is there to be discussed? The design clearly violates your ethical guidelines as I and many others have pointed out above, so there should be no discussion involved – the shirt should be removed from sale immediately.
If your ethics committee is focused solely on censorship – it is hardly ethics, more an excuse to do what you want. Why have an ethics committee if there are no ethics?
I put this point to ROM’s Scott the Red and he blamed yourselves. So either way both ROM and Spreadshirt are a disgrace with this statement today.
Oh, one more thing. Since you seem to have forgotten them, allow me to remind you of your “ethical guidelines” which you seemingly have no intention of following:
Our ethical boundaries – What we refuse to print
‘No Hate on T-Shirts’ – Some designs fulfil the legal requirements, however are ethically questionable because they transport hate or offend others in an unacceptable manner. These are designs we will choose not to print. We include here, for example:
* Politically volatile designs: Designs which are in fact legal, however in our opinion unacceptably offend, disrespect, or ridicule others or invoke violence directly or indirectly because of gender, religious affiliation, political opinion or similar characteristics. We specifically include here designs with radical right- or left-wing themes.
* Impious or disrespectful designs: Designs which intentionally or unintentionally offend feelings like mourning or sympathy. For example, designs that they allude to victims of catastrophes or attacks in a disrespectful manner, or which glorify criminal acts.
* Designs harmful to young persons: Designs which communicate sexuality as pure gratification of desire or convey inhuman values; and designs which display unnatural sexual behaviour.
We will not print designs which involve one or more of these criteria. In addition, all of our employees have the right to refuse to print any design based on an ethical or moral standard of their own. If a number of employees refuse to print a design, this design will be reviewed by our Ethics and Standards Committee.
—-
1. Some designs… are ethically questionable because they transport hate or offend others in an unacceptable manner.
2. Designs which intentionally or unintentionally offend feelings like mourning or sympathy.
—-
Why is this shirt still allowed to be sold when it quite clearly violates at least the above points? This simply reinforces my belief that your company is a poorly-run organisation intent on doing whatever it takes to generate publicity and money, even when those things cause great offence to a large number of people. Again, as I have said, your company is a disgrace.
There is no discussion needed.
Maybe start making Nazi gear as well while we are at it?
Freedom of speech? Are you serious, Dave? It is absolutely disgraceful that in the same text you admit that the design is distasteful, which is a huge understatement, and then say that you will not remove it. I can only imagine that this is a veiled attempt to disguise the “it makes us money, so we’re keeping it” reason that is really behind this disgusting decision.
It goes without saying that I will not be giving a single penny to Spreadshirt, or any sites or companies associated with it, from this moment forward. I will also be ensuring that everybody I know does the same, and I imagine many people will be making similar decisions.
I shall finish with a simple fact – your company is a disgrace.
@all – many have referenced the part of our ethical guidelines that this design would fall under. Yes, this would include references to the Holocaust, September 11th, Munich and so on. Those are things we would not print.
@Mark – we are not turning a blind eye to this. As mentioned in the post, it is being reviewed right now by our Ethics Committee.
And I’ll take a second here to express my opinion. I am strongly against this design being sold on our platform, as are a number of others here. And discussions are taking place right now to do so.
Disgrace
Well, that’s my account cancelled. How you can condone this disgrace is beyond me. Maybe I shouldn’t cancel my account, but instead take advantage of your moral cowardice and start selling Munich shirts, or maybe even a joke about the Bradfor fire. Would that pass your “stringent” ethical standards.
Sick pathetic cowardly greedy grasping scum.
Bollocks. Grow a pair.
Dave you’re backing down because of the money you make. You wouldn’t allow a Munich/hollocaust/september 11th/racist shirt on would you?
Irresponsible. Disrespectful. Disgrace
The fanbase this product aims itself at is not the Manchester United fans who have a credence with anything good or of moral fibre. Why align yourselves with a product that has offence at its centre?
Please send this top in any variety to the management of the club it’s representative of and see if they would wear or condone it?
Very sickening
Thank you for referring this to your ethics committee, can I suggest you suspend sales of these highly contentious designs until they have decided – that way you won’t increase the ill will towards ALL your merchandise and sellers that is being felt by a motivated and internet aware constituency. The website above gives a flavour of what you could bring on yourselves if you don’t.
Its a totally innappropriate design for a T Shirt. Why not go the whole hog and print a 96 Not Enough T Shirt. What a totally disgraceful reply, hiding behind an ethical argument. I hope your site is bombarded with loads of complaints and you are eventually forced out of business. Disgraceful site run by disgraceful people.
From your ethical guidelines, under the section “What we refuse to print”:
“Designs which intentionally or unintentionally offend feelings like mourning or sympathy. For example, designs that they allude to victims of catastrophes or attacks in a disrespectful manner”
In what way is a design that uses the tragic deaths of 39 people for cheap point scoring against a rival sports team not disrespectful?
What if Liverpool brought out a t-shirt saying ‘travelling to games in Munich, and returning safely’. would that be ok? GIMPS.
Selective morals eh? Quite simply “freedom of speech” used to protect disgustingly insensitive ignorant hate slogans – what a joke.
As the only morals ou really hve revolves around money, I hope people stop buying your tacky products
I think you sir are making a big mistake. You are going to war with the most powerful force on the face of this earth.
We are unstoppable and unmovable.
We know your every move and if we wanted too we could track your every breath. This site is going to be massively boycotted by the people of Liverpool and we will stop at nothing to disrupt in any way we can.
Other people have made the same mistakes you have, The Sun and The Murdock Empire, The Tories, The Yanks, we have beaten them all and come out stronger together.
It’s hilarious if you think this is a stance on Freedom of Speech, what you CAN say and what you SHOULD say are two different things and only reflects on you as a human being and what you are willing to say in order for commercial gain.
You’re a coward Dave. And I’d LOVE for you to come to Liverpool wearing that shirt. You have my email, contact me and I will personally arrange it for you.
Let’s see how your distorted view of freedom of speech fairs against the power of our people. You will be hurt Dave. Very painfully attacked and hurt. In the same way you would be if you walked into a Jewish community sporting a Swastika or a black community wearing a shirt that exclaims the N-Bomb.
There is a line, there is most definitely a line, which you have crossed.
My wife has used this company quite a few times but on telling her what has gone on, she will use it no more. Another lost customer.
Profiting from a tragedy? It makes you as sick as those ordering and wearing the controversial t-shirts.
Dear Dave, you’ve f**ked this one up I’m afraid. Whilst I’m a strong advocate of freedom of speech, this just isn’t appropriate. I certainly won’t be using your site again in the future.
twats.
I run a spreadshirt store and I seriously considering shutting it down all together.I think the previous comment is spot on. If you weren’t making money off them then you would probably do more.
People would be arrested if they wore this kind of attire at matches. Wait til the CCTV footage of a yob wearing one of the shirts you produce smashing somebody’s head in comes out, then you will not just have a few complaints to worry about!
Well just to let you know I will not be using your site and will actively encourage others to do the same. I will also be encouraging people to carry on complaining to you and your company about your lax and unethical quality control of the shops you are supporting.
I will also be reporting your website to trading standards and the police for actively supporting the release of a hate and lie filled t-shirt attacking the lives of 96 fans who passed away in a horrendous way
So what if someone want ed a t-shirt printed celebrating the Holocaust or 9/11 etc. Still freedom of speech?
Freedom of Speech and accusations of murder are not one and the same, it’s frankly cowardly to stand over something like this citing freedom of speech.
I assume, given your ‘freedom of speech’ position, you would not complain if those who found your position on this matter as distasteful as the designers of the shirt?
Or would you welcome any publicity, good or bad in nature?
At a time when chanting on sensitive issues at football games is being looked at closely, it seems ridiculous to me that any company would – not condone – but turn a blind eye on such an issue and claim they are doing so under the old ‘freedom of speech’ banner.
Such freedom does and should apply to the individual. Companies should be very careful how to what degree they support it as it could damage their reason for being.
People can be upset with something a person says. If people get upset with a company supporting what someone is saying, it can only be to the detriment of that company.
Disgusting T-shirt from an undoubtedly disgusting mind. How is this shite tollerated? This t-shirt is clearly in breach of your so-called ‘ethical guidelines’ and the sick minded twats who have thought of this, and allowed it to be sold commercially should be held to account. Shame on you.
Brave bastions of free speech, or shameless profiteering off a tragedy? Let’s not kid ourselves, it’s the latter.
I’m deleting my account, and won’t be spending any more money with your company.
Our ethical boundaries – What we refuse to print
‘No Hate on T-Shirts’ – Some designs fulfil the legal requirements, however are ethically questionable because they transport hate or offend others in an unacceptable manner. These are designs we will choose not to print. We include here, for example:
* Politically volatile designs: Designs which are in fact legal, however in our opinion unacceptably offend, disrespect, or ridicule others or invoke violence directly or indirectly because of gender, religious affiliation, political opinion or similar characteristics. We specifically include here designs with radical right- or left-wing themes.
* Impious or disrespectful designs: Designs which intentionally or unintentionally offend feelings like mourning or sympathy. For example, designs that they allude to victims of catastrophes or attacks in a disrespectful manner, or which glorify criminal acts.
* Designs harmful to young persons: Designs which communicate sexuality as pure gratification of desire or convey inhuman values; and designs which display unnatural sexual behaviour.
We will not print designs which involve one or more of these criteria. In addition, all of our employees have the right to refuse to print any design based on an ethical or moral standard of their own. If a number of employees refuse to print a design, this design will be reviewed by our Ethics and Standards Committee.
While I understand your decision and your right to produce these products, I do not agree with it and therefore I will not be buying any more products from Spreadshirt.
The T-Shirt is disrespectful to those who dies at Heysel, but perhaps even more disrespectful to Paul Nixon, the Crystal Palace fan killed by MUFC fans in a cup semi final.
You can go all around the world to look for a cop out – but this t-shirt needs withdrawing.
What a joke of a reply.
If it was a slogan about 9/11 or Munich they would have been removed a long time ago.