White Magazine shuts as advertisers withdraw due to same-sex marriage dispute
Bridal publication White Magazine has announced it will be closing its operations after the company failed to feature same-sex couples and weddings.
As a result, the magazine’s advertisers and sponsors withdrew from the publication, leaving the company “no longer economically viable”.
Posting a ‘farewell’ blog on its website, White Magazine said: “A campaign was launched targeting the magazine, our team and our advertisers. Couples who have featured in our magazine have also been the subject of online abuse despite their individual beliefs. We’re really saddened by this.
“The result has been that a number of advertisers withdrew their sponsorship out of fear of being judged, or in protest. We have had to recognise the reality that White Magazine is no longer economically viable.”
The Christian publishers, who posted the farewell on Saturday, said despite having “no agenda but love” the publication had received “a flood of judgement”.
White Magazine’s founders, Luke and Carla Burrell, said the magazine, its team and its advertisers were the target of an unfavourable campaign.
“Instead of allowing us the space to work through our thoughts and feelings, or being willing to engage in brave conversations to really hear each other’s stories, some have just blindly demanded that we pick a side.
“We’re not about sides, we’re about love, patience and kindness,” the farewell blog continued.
The magazine, which launched 12 years ago, included a directory of brands and businesses it worked with, such as bridal brands, catering companies, venues, florists, stylists and photographers.
In a video posted at the conclusion of the blog, its founders discussed the plebiscite vote and the magazine’s position and beliefs.
Carla Burrell said White Magazine didn’t want to enter into “that conversation” and “add heat to a hot conversation”.
“It has just come to a point where there is just a clash against us and against culture and hurting people isn’t part of what we want to do.
“When the plebiscite happened, everybody was putting up their support of the campaign, supporting same-sex marriage.
“We started getting messages then saying ‘you’re the only magazine in Australia that’s not showing your support like come on guys jump on board, move forward with 2018’, but then there was always something that just stopped us because we just didn’t want to enter into that conversation that wasn’t a loving conversation.
Carla Burrell’s husband, Luke, agreed arguing that values are now more important than relationships.
“The accusations that it is unfair that at this time we are not featuring same-sex marriage, I get that can be hurtful and people feel like that’s unfair and that is part of the tear within us because we don’t want anyone to feel that way.
“You see beliefs and values tear families and marriages and friendships apart.
“Why are values becoming more important than relationships and why can’t we have diversity of thought and feelings? I think without those things we are not progressing.”
A lot of talking around the issue here and discussions about values – but why not simply reverse the position and feature same-sex marriage? Or just feature them from the beginning?
User ID not verified.
and so it begins
User ID not verified.
A dinosaur publication goes exist because it fails to evolve. And ironically they probably also believe dinosaur bones were placed here to test our faith.
User ID not verified.
Hello, Department of Religious Freedom? Yes, I’d like to apply for a Diversity of Thought and Feelings Grant. ‘Failing business’ category, sub-category ‘Won’t someone think of the children’. We’ll take 10 full-page ads and 20 half-page, thanks.
User ID not verified.
42.2% voted no, and would represent plenty of people who voted that way on religious grounds. Let them believe what they want without howling them down. That’s kinda democracy. Or have we forgotten that?
User ID not verified.
Gay marriage, a convenient excuse for a business failure. And an outing for the haters too.
User ID not verified.
It looks like 42.2% of the population isn’t a viable market. Whoops.
User ID not verified.
Last time I checked, ‘howling’ was still free speech. And readers and advertisers are allowed to walk away from publications… that’s “kinda democracy”. Nobody’s rights have been violated here. The right to religious freedom doesn’t come with some magical protection from market forces.
User ID not verified.
They are a wedding publication. Publish weddings!!! Another great step in the right direction getting rid of it.
User ID not verified.
I’m a big advocate of a diverse world, and don’t personally agree with the values this company is sticking to; but at the same time we have to respect people’s viewpoints any way they come. They have learned the consequence of a polarised viewpoint, and didn’t have on board the right sponsors obviously if that’s the way they operate. That’s really dying on your sword unfortunately and having to suffer the consequences at the end of the day, as heartless as that sounds.
I do think that the brands who pulled out are fantastic for openly supporting all people and taking a stand like this. Kudos to them. I wish we could celebrate who they are.
Values ARE more important than relationships, or they are meaningless.
User ID not verified.
For a group of people with ‘no agenda but love’ it sounds suspiciously like they had a very obvious agenda.
User ID not verified.
No, it means they’re a cashed-up minority who are sick of being discriminated against and they, like the advertisers who value a diverse audience and customer base (and yes, the income they represent) voted with their dollars. It’s called democracy, dear.
User ID not verified.
Here we go again with the tiresome same sex marriage debate. You have to admire the tenacity of social media bullies who are all for diversity but can’t tolerate diverse views that don’t match their own.
User ID not verified.
Completely agree, how is this social/political issue being dragged in to a failing business. Seems like a result of poor business sense and strategy. Using this as an excuse is rubbish
User ID not verified.
My thoughts exactly
User ID not verified.
Unfortunately the publishers have confused ‘values’ with beliefs’.
Though it must have been a very tough 12 months for them.
It’s just as well gay people didn’t have to endure 12 months of inequality, injustice, hatred and abuse.
I applaud Australia’s broad acceptance of the what is now ‘bleeding obvious’ – that same-sex marriage has done no damage to Australia’s values. In my perception it has actually improved them on the score of tolerance and equality at a time when our overall our values seem to be slipping.
User ID not verified.
I wished those who rushed to comment had first read what Luke & Carla had posted in their farewell message.
They made sense and their refusal to be drawn or baited into a controversy not of their making is noteworthy.
Instead of blaming the hate squad, they have chosen to walk away from their 12 year labour of love.
They didn’t choose this fight and refused to be drawn into one.
It’s a difficult and heartbreaking decision which deserves empathy and respect.
Not to be diminished into so much kindling to stoke the flames of division, victimhood and anger.
User ID not verified.
I was clearly talking about the publishers here, dear.
User ID not verified.
In a decade or so the decision to not feature same sex weddings will seem as logical as a rejecting mixed race marriages today.
Maybe they could now focus on a magazine that assists Anglican schools to weed out and sack gay teachers in 2019. At least there is an existing market for that product.
User ID not verified.
62% of Australians voted YES , where are you getting your figures ?
User ID not verified.