Timeline for Is it reasonable for me to complain about an objectionable newspaper being ordered for the office?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 4, 2017 at 14:39 | comment | added | Trebor | @peufeu Valid point. There's no telling how many of OP's coworkers read the paper in question - it's not exactly niche | |
| Dec 1, 2017 at 18:00 | comment | added | bobflux | @RobBailey Sometimes it is better not knowing: since this seems to be a very popular newspaper, it is likely that at least several colleagues enjoy reading it. If OP comes out as self-appointed thought police, I would expect office politics to turn sour pretty quick... | |
| Nov 30, 2017 at 10:36 | comment | added | Konrad Rudolph | As objectionable as “BILD” is, “Daily Mail” is generally considered quite a lot worse so I think this comparison isn’t as apt as it may seem. Germany doesn’t really have an equivalent as far as I know: German tabloids are a lot milder than UK ones. | |
| Nov 29, 2017 at 16:01 | comment | added | Trebor | @Philbo I agree that letting it go is really the best thing to do in this situation, but my point was that the OP needs to know who requested the paper before even considering whether to request its removal. Even criticising it around coworkers is risky until the OP knows who they might be offending (and the walls, as always, have ears!) | |
| Nov 28, 2017 at 18:42 | comment | added | Daniel | @Sidar: Did not mean it that way. Was simply referring to the OP's notion this paper was somehow corrupting his colleagues. | |
| Nov 28, 2017 at 17:25 | comment | added | Sidar |
stupid people will still be stupid Hello high horse.
|
|
| Nov 28, 2017 at 16:08 | comment | added | Philbo | @Daniel Good point. | |
| Nov 28, 2017 at 16:04 | comment | added | Daniel | @Philbo: Hence the recommendation to let it go. But if OP can´t do that, still better to talk about real risks for the company's reputation than about a political agenda. Remember this is the workplace SE, we are not here to advise the OP what to do, but how to do it with the best chances of success. | |
| Nov 28, 2017 at 15:58 | comment | added | Philbo | @RobBailey remember this is the workplace stackexchange. I don't think this is the best answer, because if it turns out OP's boss (or anyone else influential) picked this newspaper, and OP starts negatively talking about its reputation to anyone who'll listen, it's going to reflect badly on the newpaper-picker, who in turn may decide to make things difficult for OP (pass over for promotion / worst projects / sat next to the smelly person etc). | |
| Nov 28, 2017 at 14:22 | comment | added | Trebor | This is the best answer, IMO. The paper is there because one or more people wanted it there. The OP should find out who these people are before deciding how to progress, as they could be owner/CEO level, If they are very senior, then attacking the reputation of the paper is much less likely to cause offense, which makes it more likely that something will change. | |
| Nov 28, 2017 at 13:13 | history | edited | Draken | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Changed apostrophe, spelling mistake corrections
|
| Nov 28, 2017 at 13:11 | history | answered | Daniel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |