What do these 2 big 'culture war' stories this week have in common?
1. M&S launches new underwear range 'inspired by George Floyd'. 2. St Paul's Girls' School no longer using the term 'head girl' because it's 'too binary'.
The answer is, oddly, neither is quite what it seems.
The 'George Floyd Underwear' story: The Daily Mail tweet that popularised the idea he 'inspired' it is below.
If you open the image, you can see the DM tweet says 'inspired by George Floyd' in quotes, as if M&S said that. But the article itself does not contain that quote at all
If you read the M&S press release, this is the only mention of George Floyd (bwlo).
Ie: The Daily Mail seem to have picked that up & summarised it as inspired by George Floyd, and added quotes around that phrase, which people read as if that's what M&S have actually said.
The other story, about St Paul’s Girls’ School removing the title 'Head Girl' for being 'too binary'.
The school itself says that actually they're reverting to the original title of 'Head of School', and that 17/18 year olds prefer something more 'age-appropriate and inclusive'
Maybe you could say the note there mentions the title being 'inclusive', and could infer that's about gender, but still: the headline at the top of this thread literally says they're changing it " because it's 'too binary' " (with quotes) while the school says something different
Perhaps either/both of these stories is still worth discussion, and maybe each of the organisations can be criticised for various things, but it's worth knowing what's the actual story & what's largely a controversial edge the headline/summary writers have added.
In case you're interested in the detail, here is the M&S press release:
A few weeks ago, there were a couple of popular tweets declaring that the "mad umbrella shop" and "mad sailor shop" in London had survived the pandemic.
It is with regret that I report that the "mad sailor shop", Arthur Beale's, is closing, one of the oldest shops in London.
If you've ever passed the shop, you've probably noticed the sign says "Established Four Centuries".
Nobody knows exactly how old it is, but there is a card in the British Museum from 1791 showing it was already a well-established business at that point.
I often post photos of their brilliant shop windows. Here's one from a couple of years ago, where they had a full moving underwater scene.
The whole "Prince William is world's sexiest bald man" says "Google study" thing.
I'm sure most people realise what's happened, but in case not, here is a brief explanation:
This is the headline on the version of the story that's been shared the most (from the Independent)...
That's quite a neat headline, as it makes it sound like the study is *by* Google, when obviously it isn't.
They back that up in the text with this note.
The study was 'using Google'.
You can also see above, The Independent cite that the report appeared in The Sun. That basically means they've cribbed the whole article from The Sun & put a small spin on it.
The Independent's tweet has been very heavily shared.
With Thorntons closing all 61 stores, being able to generate demand online is hugely important.
As you can see from this chart of Google searches for their brand name (text search), basically over the last 18 months Hotel Chocolat have 'eaten them alive' online.
It's peak 'easter egg' season, so not a great time for this news to come out.
Thorntons rank #2 in Google organic search for 'easter eggs' in the UK but they're not particularly visible as competitor ads bump them down a fair way.
Bidding on 'head terms' like 'easter eggs' is not always a wise thing to do, but you'd have thought they'd at least make it into the shopping ads there which (even reloading & going incognito) are almost entirely Hotel Chocolat.