Private Eye ‘explains’ (sort of) its reasons for pulling Wild Justice adverts

Last month satirical magazine Private Eye published a full-page advert post by Wild Justice which highlighted the absurd release of 50 million non-native pheasants into the UK countryside every year (see here).

It was one of three adverts that Wild Justice had placed (and paid for) in Private Eye, with the second one due for publication in the following edition.

However, at short notice and without explanation, Private Eye decided to pull the remaining two adverts and repaid the publication fees to Wild Justice. That decision sparked a lot of online commentary and caused something of a Streisand Effect (here).

The following edition of Private Eye in early April contained three letters from readers, including one from BASC’s deputy director of communications and public affairs, that focused on slagging off Wild Justice and/or its Directors but, tellingly, didn’t/couldn’t address the absurd reality of releasing 50 million non-native pheasants into the countryside. It’s almost as though their letters were knee-jerk responses to the acute embarrassment of having this truth told (see here). It was disappointing that Private Eye chose to publish them without providing any alternate views.

However, this week, the current edition of Private Eye features more letters about Wild Justice’s advert, this time from WJ supporters:

There’s also an explanation, of sorts, from the Private Eye editor, about why the other two Wild Justice adverts had been pulled.

He claims, “…The decision was taken purely because we felt the advertisement blurred the line between advertising and editorial. And we did not want to continue with this…“.

Hmm. This might be more believable if Private Eye had made this decision prior to accepting the first advert for publication, rather than in the days following publication when some of the pro-gamebird shooting organisations were getting themselves all hot, bothered and indignant.

Ah well, at least the subject of mass pheasant releases was prominent in three editions of Private Eye, all for the price of one!

One thought on “Private Eye ‘explains’ (sort of) its reasons for pulling Wild Justice adverts”

  1. I have always enjoyed the copies of private eye when I am on the train, but I have decided to stop buying it, because it’s obvious that they are not on the side of freedom of speech, and the freedom to advertise the wrong doings of the over privileged scumbag rich, who are not just happy to trample on the rights of the people, but they are more than happy to trample all over our wildlife too. All I can say, is shame on you private eye, and even more shame on the person in control, who decided that their contract to publish these adverts wasn’t worth the paper it was written on, and I can only hope that enough people who have been buying this rag, decide to do what I have decided to do, and stop buying it, and if this means that they suffer enough to see the error of their decision, or even fold up entirely, then it’s only themselves that they have to blame.

Leave a comment