Orange you glad you Blog?
Be careful what you blog about when you work for Orange, the telecom company in the UK. This is an email I received about a guy at Orange who got busted for blogging. Because I’m running to twelve different meetings this morning, I’m posting this as I got it.
In a nutshell, an Orange employee posted about how "if you object to your transport being blown up on the way to work, then you’re Islamophobic."
A few people complained to Orange, and they originally stood by their employee, saying that Orange employees have the right to free speech.
Then more people complained, and Orange suspended the employee while they investigate.
Not being 100% familiar with British Government, I won’t comment either way, I’ll just post what I received from someone close to the incident. I’d love some of my British readers to add any comments they might have…
Read from the bottom up.
_________________________
#BLOG LINK: http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2006/08/inigo_wilson_a_.html
#EMAIL EXCHANGE:
From: Press, Office [mailto:press.office@orange.co.uk]
Sent: 15 August 2006 18:46
Subject: RE: Complaint against Orange PR person has made irresponsible comments.
Orange has received a number of complaints regarding the content of an article written by an Orange employee and published on an independent website which has offended some of our customers.
We take the opinions of our customers very seriously and believe that this matter warrants further investigation. We have therefore suspended an employee while this investigation takes place.
—–Original Message—–
Sent: 15 August 2006 13:34
To: JACKSON, Stuart; Press, Office
Cc: Executive, Office
Subject: RE: Inigo Wilson
Dear Sirs,
Thank you for your response to the complaint about Mr Inigio Wilson who has made racist and islamaphobic comments in an article which begins with a description of his employer (yourselves).
Before I communicate your response more widely I would like to give you opportunity to clarify your statement.
Please confirm your response is:
(1) you respect the right of your employees to hold racist and islamaphobic views;
(2) you will be taking no action whatsoever against your employee and will allow your employees to make racist and islamaphobic comments without question even where they reference their employer as a preface to such comments;
(3) your response has been fully approved by Orange UK Executive Office on behalf of Orange SA.
Kind regards.
——————————————————————————–
From: JACKSON, Stuart [mailto:stuart.jackson@orange.co.uk]
Sent: 15 August 2006 11:16
To: Press, Office
Subject: Ref: Inigo Wilson
Ref: Inigo Wilson
Thank you for sharing your comments with Orange.
Though we respect the right of our employees to do so, Orange does not hold or express opinions on such matters, therefore the article you referenced does not in any way represent the views of our organisation.
Orange
Sent: 12 August 2006 17:22
To: ‘customer.services@orange.co.uk’; ‘orangepr@golinharris.com’; ‘executive.office@orange.co.uk’; ‘pr@orange.co.uk’; ‘public.relations@orange.co.uk’
Subject: Complaint against Orange PR person has made irresponsible comments.
Dear Sirs,
I am writing to register an official complaint about public comments from a member of your team. Mr. Inigio Wilson is a "community affairs" PR man for Orange and I was dismayed to see that he has written islamaphobic and racist comments which were they anti-semitic as opposed to against muslims would result in immediate condemnation from you. I trust you will deal with this complaint fairly and condemn such comments which have been indirectly linked to Orange at the beginning of the article. He says:
(1) "Islamophobic - anyone who objects to having their transport blown up on the way to work."
This is islamaphobic in the sense that it obfuscates the fact that Islamaphobia exists and it suggests that all victims of terrorism are islamaphobic (which is an offence to all innocent victims of 7/7 including muslim victims). Islamaphobia is the irrational fear of Islam and is a phrase which is used to describe prejudice against Islam which is especially important since such prejudice does not fall into the definition of racism. Further this comment is clearly trying to falsely polarise the problem of Islamist terrorism by saying that all muslims are terrorists - as a muslim I condemn having my transport blown up but clearly I do not consider myself islamaphobic.
(2) "Palestinians - archetype ‘victims’ no matter how many teenagers they murder in bars and fast food outlets. Never responsible for anything they do – or done in their name - because of ‘root causes’ or ‘legitimate grievances’."
This comment is clear racism against Palestinians and suggests all Palestinians are responsible for terrorsim which is clearly untrue.
This is published on the internet with indirect reference to Orange in the article. The article is live at http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2006/08/inigo_wilson_a_.html and a printout is attached.
As a very longstanding Orange customer who has enjoyed otherwise good customer service from orange, I think Orange need to find a more appropriate "community" PR representative who does not hold such islamaphobic and racist views. I would also urge you to reconsider instructing a PR firm which allows its staff to comment in such an inappropriate way.
Please tell me how you intend to deal with this matter and please inform me of what action you will be taking against your islamaphobic and racist PR representative. I would appreciate a response from Orange Executive office and would request an apology and retraction from Mr Wilson. My address and main Orange phone number appears below.
Kind regards,
Mr
Address:
Orange phone number:
–
ConservativeHome Comments policy (from their website)
If you see anything on ConservativeHome that you find objectionable please alert the Editor by emailing tim@conservativehome.com.
Potentially actionable remarks and all impersonations of another person - a public figure or otherwise - are likely to result in an immediate and permanent ban on the source IP address.
Homophobic, racist or other hateful posts will also result in permanent bans.
Bad language, personal nastiness or posts that are overly long, tangential or simply tedious may be deleted and their authors may be subject to temporary or permanent bans.
The Editor’s decision is final with regard to any and all bans. The Editor also reserves the right to edit any comments - removing bad language or other objectionable material.
12 Responses to “Orange you glad you Blog?”
I think the comments this individual made were not just racist but also he made comments criticising his own personnel department at Orange. Under British employment laws he could now be fired for gross misconduct.
If this guy had made anti-semitic comments, something which he had the good sense to avoid, we would be hanging his head on stick here in Britain! islamophobia is as bad as anti-semitism and so I have little sympathy for this guy.
Another interesting comment from this side of the pond is that the conservatice political party on whose blog the racist remarks have been made are currently trying to repackage themselves as a moderate centrist party. In this environment the right-wingers have been rebelling and making more and more outrageous comments. Seems like this right winger went a bit too far.
As a Community Affairs Manager for an international telecoms group with a presence around the globe, Mr. Wilson is extremely naïve to believe that posting such comments on a prominent website would not invoke a hostile response.
Having considered the facts, Mr. Wilson must be dismissed by his employer for the following reasons:
(1) Whilst we should all uphold freedom of speech, that freedom must be exercised responsibly. Following the official definition of racism, Mr. Wilson’s comments can clearly be defined as racist. They may also be an incitement to racial hatred. As such, there may be grounds for a criminal prosecution.
(2) His comments may be regarded as offensive to a variety of communities including followers of Islam, Palestinians, South Africans and Roman Catholics. As such, in addition to being considered racist in the former (presumably a breach of his terms of employment), he will be unable to effectively carry out his duties in fostering good relations with such groups, thus further breaching his terms of employment.
(3) His comments may be regarded as offensive to other groups such as teachers, social workers, employees of NGO’s, those who would describe themselves as socialists and so forth. Indeed his views are not exclusively offensive to these groups, and may be considered offensive to all those who espouse tolerance and respect – from all communities and all walks of life. This further enforces the breach of terms of employment raised above.
(4) The author appears to condone racism by asserting to be a racist is deemed as being “much worse than being violent, thoughtless or unkind” - placing him at odds with his employer and contract of employment.
(5) This is added to by his comments on hate crime.
(6) Wilson’s comments in relation to equality, diversity and gender issues will likewise be at odds with his employer and breach his contract of employment.
(7) Responsible, I read, for consultation with communities, Mr. Wilson describes same as “a formal system for ignoring public views while patronising them at the same time.” This statement places him at odds with his employer and his duties, thus again breaching his contract of employment.
(8) Comments relating to the BBC and media ensure relationships in this area are likewise compromised, thus breaching terms of employment.
The above, combined, ensure Mr. Wilson will be unable to continue to perform the duties of his role. By HIS actions, (many of which will counter his employers’ policies) HE ALONE has made himself unable to fulfil his role and thus contract of employment with Orange.
Remember, it was Mr. Wilson who indirectly referenced his employer by his introduction: “Inigo Wilson manages community affairs for a large telecoms company.” He also made comments in relation to both a colleague and a discussion within his organisation.
Again, whilst we all should seek to uphold freedom of expression, such expression must be exercised responsibly and within the legal framework of the UK. What is remarkable is that such a prominent and educated figure did not recognise the above, and how his comments would be interpreted by others (the key legal factor), regardless of the context in which they were intended.
It is also regrettable that because of his action, his employer, Orange, is now at the centre of a debate on which it has no desire to enter. Here Orange cannot win. Its actions will be no different to any other organisation caught in the same position – Vodafone, 02 or others. To think otherwise is foolhardy.
What is certain is that the reputation of his employer, its brand, customer relations and commercial activity will be damaged regardless of the outcome – further strengthening the requirement to dismiss Mr. Wilson.
Sadly the future looks bleak for not only Mr. Wilson, but for his employer, good community relations and all those who recognise greater understanding, mutual respect and humanity is the only future for our world.
Inigo?
“You keeled my blog. Prepare to die!”
Inigo Wilson has the right to free speech which he chose to use by posting clearly offensive comments, made all the more insensitive by recent events in the UK. Orange hasn’t curtailed his freedom of speech but chosen to decide whether or not Inigo’s personal views are similar to Orange’s.
His comments are more substantially offensive than your post makes clear (but if your running 12 meetings that’s fair enough!) but a point raised by several bloggers in the UK is that as a Community Affairs spokesman for the firm it is difficult to argue he can keep his job given his lack of understanding of communities.
UPDATE on Inigo Wilson and Orange
Peter Shankman, CEO of New York PR consultancy Geek Factory, has posted about the suspension of Orange employee, Inigo Wilson. Peter’s contribution is fairly innocuous but he has also included an exchange of emails from within Orange following the init…
The biggest issue here, which *so many* people are missing, is that HE WAS JOKING.
It was a *satirical* article, poking fun at the British ‘left wing’ in general - it wasn’t even aimed at Islam, for the most part. It wasn’t particularly funny, but it certainly wasn’t malicious, and was in the British tradition of gently antagonistic humour.
It doesn’t matter is the joke is aimed at Muslims, Jews, atheists, whites, blacks, or greens: if we are to lose our freedom of speech to the extent we can’t poke fun at people or indulge in satirical humour, what next?
The refusal by some bloggers to recognise the context of this article is incredible!
The “definitions” were never given to be the views of Inigo, they were a parody of what the Left sometimes imply with their language.
If you read the other definitions he couldn’t make it clearer that people shouldn’t be judged by their skin or belief system.
Just thought you might like to know that ‘anonymous’, presumably a MPACUK person, has been posting this same comment to all Inigo Wilson-related blog postings.
I think Inigo opened himself up by mentioning work situations specifically on his blog, which is the same justification that companies from Delta to a museum have used to fire bloggers.
The main point that *so many* people who *defend* Inigo’s actions seem to miss is that what did they think Orange would do when this blew up?
I blog in a personal capacity about PR. I work for a PR firm. Therefore I am certain not to defame clients, make any kind of statement that may be misconstrued, or do anything that may compromise my job or reputation - personal or otherwise.
This doesn’t stop me from raising contentious issues (see the Colin Farrington debate). But what was Inigo thinking?
Indeed, what was he thinking? Certainly he was joking, but the butt of his jokes was…people who object to bigotry. His jokes were, in fact, pro-bigotry, and he clearly identified himself, his position, and his industry.
He’s not very funny and he’s certainly not very bright.
Freedom of Speech doesn’t mean one should never be held accountable for one’s remarks. When you’re posting a comment, you’re going on the record with those remarks. It’s fair to say Orange would not be likely to hire someone who publicly made jokes that offensive, so it’s natural that this will have some career impact on Wilson.
They shouldn’t suspend him; that just puts him on ice and prolongs this whole thing. They should demote him and have him issue an apology. If nothing else, he’s got to regret this whole, very public mess, and he can just say so.
Guido Fawkes has discovered a beautifully ironic twist: Orange has sponsored debates on freedom of speech.
“Orange and Index on Censorship have linked up to create an innovative partnership designed to stimulate debate on social and political issues” The first Orange Index Debate at the University of London was on the subject “Does a civilised society need censorship?”
The Orange Index Debates formed part of a wider partnership between Orange and Index on Censorship, which included in-depth research about issues relating to censorship and freedom of speech and led to Index on Censorship publishing “The A-Z of Free Expression”. Denise Lewis, Orange Group Director of Corporate Affairs, said at the time: “Orange Index Debates is the first Orange initiative to extend its literary portfolio into student environments, building on Orange’s longstanding commitment to encouraging debate and providing a platform for people to communicate and share their passions.”
Obviously that commitment to literature, debate and the fight against censorship does not extend to staff writing on Tory blogs…
Guido has been unable to get anyone at Index on Censorship to comment.