AUSTRALIA: Network Gets Blowback After Airing Titanic-Themed Anti-Gay Marriage Ad [VIDEO]

Australia’s News Corp outlet reports:

Foxtel is facing a backlash from some subscribers after it decided to screen advertisements opposing same-sex marriage. The ads, created by anti-gay marriage group Marriage Alliance, were knocked back by the Seven and Ten networks but have been screened by the pay TV provider. People took to Facebook to vent their anger, with many saying they would cancel their Foxtel subscription. “Just cancelled my account – Netflix is much less homophobic, and better value,” Brendan Terry wrote. “What’s new on Foxtel this week? Bigotry, hatred and lies,” wrote Bradles McBell. Some question Foxtel for airing advertisements for I Am Cait, the new reality show about Caitlyn Jenner’s transition, alongside the anti-equality message in the ads.

News Corp owns 50% of Foxtel.

RELATED: Marriage Alliance is also using those infamous Irish homocons in one of their promotional clips.

  • JT
    • StraightGrandmother

      News Corp looks to have it both ways.
      Gay Hating Fox
      Yet pro gay shows in entertainment

    • Till death do my money and I part.

  • Ninja0980

    All I can say is GOOD!
    You want to pander to bigots, pay the price.

  • zhera

    That’s a ridiculous iceberg. And if I’m to continue with the Titanic theme, the ship would’ve been fine if it had been fitted with double chambers (not sure that’s the right name for it in English). And all the people would’ve survived if there had been enough lifeboats.

    Conclusion: The iceberg is an iceberg, you can’t change that. Make your boat stronger and it’ll survive.

    Same-sex relationships are a fact, whether they’re called marriages or not. Keep your eye on your own relationship, make it stronger and it’ll survive.

    However, the analogy with Titanic and the iceberg is stupid. SSM won’t sink any straight marriages, unless of course the ‘straight’ marriage isn’t so straight after all…

    • Oscarlating Wildely

      I had the same reaction to that iceberg. So far from a good rendering! ‘Not sure that thing wouldn’t have just rolled over on its side and played dead– kind of like this campaign should do.

    • McSwagg

      Actually the failure of the hull of the Titanic was due to the use of a lower grade steel in the welded plates forming the hull. At low temperatures, the grade of steel that was used becomes extremely brittle. Once the Titanic hit the iceberg, the crack in the hull spread like breaking glass.

      I think you are referring in your comment to a double hull, that is one hull inside another. This is the standard now for new oil tankers.

      Another problem with the Titanic is that the bulkheads were not sealed at the top. Even when all the bulkheads were closed to isolate the compartments, water still flowed over the top of the compromised compartment into the next. Imagine filling an ice cue tray by adding water to the first compartment and then tilting the tray so that the water flows over into the next compartment.

      You are correct about the lack of lifeboats and the fact that the Titanic is a poor analogy to Marriage Equality.

      • Reality.Bites

        Also the evacuation was disorganized and there were lifeboats that left with space available.

      • zhera

        Yes, I meant hull.

      • ericpayne

        Sigh. Another day, another historical inaccuracy.

        The steel of Titanic was of the highest quality in 1911, when she was constructed. In fact, she was built from the same steel (literally from the same lots of steel) as that of her sister, Olympic, which entered service a year prior to Titanic and continued in service, despite no less than 3 major accidents, until the mid 1930s, earning her the nickname “Old Reliable.” She was finally taken out of service when Cunard and White Star merged, as she was deemed redundant to the new, singular, company’s needs.

        Even though there were not “lifeboats for all,” the number of lifeboats onboard exceeded the minimum number necessary by law, in both England and the United States. It was just taken as a matter of course by the sea traveller of 1912 that there existed an inherent risk to life… just as there is in traveling by air, now.

        But even if she had carried 64 boats, the crew were too poorly trained in evacuation procedure; there were no boat assignments for either crew or passengers, there had been no lifeboat drill, and the crew were unsure of the safe capacity of the lifeboats — all but the last two boats were launched with less than half the capacity of the boat.

        Titanic sank because, well, to be blunt, because she filled with water. Though that’s a “Duh!” moment, the reason she filled with water was in the construction of the watertight compartments the period press touted as making he “practically unsinkable.” These compartments weren’t capped, so as one filled, it would overflow to the next. The bow would settle lower in the sea, more water would enter and… think of an ice cube tray held at an angle below a running faucet: eventually all the compartments get filled. Same thing here — the builders thought there could be nothing worse than a vertices rupture of the hull at a juncture of 2 weathertight compartments; those two compartments would fill, but the buoyancy of the other compartments would keep the ship afloat. Instead, they got a below-water horizontal uneven poking along 350 feet of the hull.

        • McSwagg

          The Titanic and the Olympic were indeed constructed side by side at the same time and thus from the same sources of materials.

          Each of the accidents experienced by the Olympic occurred in warmer water where the steel is still ductile. The Olympic never hit an iceberg in the frigid waters of the North Atlantic.

          “After the sinking, engineers immediately retrofitted the Titanic’s sister ship Olympic with a double hull.”

          The fact that they were constructed of the highest quality steel available at the time does not negate the fact that the steel was of a composition that becomes extremely brittle at low temperatures. The analysis of the steel is based on samples recovered from the seabed and examined and tested by metallurgical and naval engineers. Our knowledge of material science and metallurgy has advanced significantly in the last 100 years. Each of the links below is from a professional journal or an engineering university.

          Here is a Scientific American video from Yale University for the nontechnical person:

          You are correct that the Titanic ultimately sank because she filled with water and the water flowed over the tops of the ‘sealed’ compartments to flood the adjacent compartment. You even use the same ‘ice tray’ analogy that I used. The ultimate reason the first five compartments filled with water is due to a hull breach originally caused by the collision with the iceberg. The hull breach was exacerbated by the brittle steel in the hull.

          Here is a simulation of the sinking put together by movie director James Cameron for National Geographic. Remember that Cameron is the guy that found the Titanic as well as directed the motion picture.

          • William

            Robert Ballard found the Titanic, not Cameron.

            Nobody has mentioned the rivets which held the hull plating to the ship’s framework. Rivets were sheared off by the iceberg, causing the hull plates to separate and let water in.

          • McSwagg

            You are right. Ballard discovered the Titanic in 1985. Cameron mounted an expedition in 1995 that gathered video footage only that was used as the basis of his film “Titanic”.

            The weak rivets were an additional factor that allowed hull plates to separate. The brittle steel theory is based on metallurgical analysis of samples recovered from the wreck. Historical records do indicate that, in the rush to finish construction on time, rivets were ordered from a previously certified producer. Samples of those rivets appear to be of a lower quality wrought iron. “Finite element models [a type of computer simulation] of rivets made from sub-standard materials show
            that they were already loaded near their ultimate strength when


            The damaged section of the hull, the starboard bow, is buried up to what was the waterline in the seafloor. Researchers are unable to view the actual damaged section of the hull.

          • William

            This was an interesting program on the sinking. They did tests on similar rivets but didn’t take into account all factors. The water temperature was below freezing when the ship hit the iceberg. Also, the method used for riveting the test section used a mechanical rivet press. At the time Titanic was built, riveting involved two guys with hammers. There wasn’t any mention of possibly low quality rivets. All of these factors should have been taken under consideration.


    • AngelaChanning

      If the Titanic was an Olivia Cruise, that hole would have been fixed in a jiffy. đŸ™‚

      • Kenster999

        Or otherwise plugged if an Atlantis cruise.

    • Sporkfighter

      “The iceberg is an iceberg, you can’t change that. Make your boat stronger and it’ll survive.”

      Choosing to avoid the iceberg works too. They could always mind their own business and let others do the same.

  • So, the network airs both anti-gay advertisements and a pro-trans show. Sounds like Foxtel has its legs spread wide and is taking all comers.

  • Tony Adams

    A threatening iceberg is supposed to have unseen bulk beneath the surface of the water in excess of what is visible. This one is entirely non-threatening, and says that same-sex marriage is easily navigated by all. In a moment of funny coincidence, their paid-for ad for the video popped up while I was watching it on JMG>

    • zhera

      Exactly. I think it’s 10/90 above/under water?

      • David Walker

        Only if you trust science.

  • I bet NOM is jealous of the Marriage Alliance’s ability to even run this kind of advertisement, it’s been a while since the last time we saw anything like this from NOM.

  • goofy_joe

    The top of that iceberg is really big…I don’t think they really thought that analogy through. Surprise surprise.

    • David Walker

      True. “That’s just the tip of the iceberg” should have entered SOMEone’s cliche-addled brain.

      • vorpal

        These are probably barely educated loons that think that the universe is less than 10,000 years old. I think you’re expecting a little much from them.

  • vorpal

    From the video description on YouTube:
    “It’s time we have a fair, open debate on the consequences of same sex marriage”

    Scrolling down:
    “Comments are disabled for this video.”


    • Queequeg

      Typical of the right wingers. On the rare site where you can actually post a comment, it will be deleted and you will be blocked if you disagree with their viewpoint. Yet, they are always screaming about freedom and free speech. What they mean is free speech for them.

  • Doug105

    Same traditions as NOM?

  • What stays in the ‘family’ stays in the ‘family’.

  • NedFlaherty

    Similar to America’s NOM, Australia’s “Marriage Alliance” tries to stay secretive about its owners, operators, and donors.

    But the primary financial sponsors are — no surprise — all Roman Catholic organizations that were approved, founded, and funded by the Vatican:

    Knights of Malta
    St Thomas More Society
    St Vincent’s Hospital
    University of Notre Dame
    Campion College
    Sisters of Charity
    The Benenson Society
    Brisbane Catholic Education Council
    Garvan Institute
    Catholic Education Office
    Marist Finance Commission

  • William

    Doesn’t Rupert have a room reservation at a British prison?