It’s fair to say the organisers of Belgian UCI WorldTour race the E3 Harelbeke have a bit of form when it comes to courting controversy with promotional posters for the event, which traditionally kicks off Flanders week – and this year is no exception, leading to accusations on social media of sexism.
Roughly translated, it says “Who’ll 'squeeze' in Harelbeke?” and references Peter Sagan’s infamous pinching of a podium hostess’s bottom after he finished second to Fabian Cancellara in the 2012 Tour of Flanders – indeed, a picture of that incident appears beneath the 2015 poster on the race’s Facebook page.
Despite featuring on the UCI WorldTour calendar, the race lacks the status of the previous week’s Milan-San Remo, or those which immediately follow it, Gent-Wevelgem and the Tour of Flanders.
That’s led some to suggest that by publicising the race with posters that are guaranteed to provoke controversy, organisers are ensuring the race gets talked about, and it’s not the first time that such adverts have been labelled sexist and demeaning to women.
Here’s a selection of responses to this year’s poster on Twitter.
E3 Harelbeke goes for the poster publicity stunt every year. A pity they distract from what's become a very good race with a tough course.
— the Inner Ring (@inrng) February 23, 2015
Wonder what posters @E3Harelbeke will use for the womens race? Oh, no womens race.
— The Broom Wagon (@broomwagonblog) February 23, 2015
@E3Harelbeke This isn’t acceptable in 2015. As a World Tour race standards should be better @UCI_cycling
— M2 Sports Management (@M2_Sports) February 23, 2015
Sorry for being late to the party but that #E3 ad is awesome! If you wear flares, drive a Ford Capri and live in the ’70’s.
— John Galloway (@wjohngalloway) February 23, 2015
We all want to see some leadership from @UCI_cycling ProTour teams and voicing their concerns with the @E3Harelbeke sexist advertising.
— Mark Legg (@MrKatieCompton) February 23, 2015
68 thoughts on “E3 Harelbeke organisers slammed over “sexist” poster”
http://youtu.be/W3Qn1uHlRIY
http://youtu.be/W3Qn1uHlRIY
DavidC
:))
look at the 2011, 2012, 2013
look at the 2011, 2012, 2013 posters, ha ha the 2011 is a naked girl making a contour of a hill, the 2012 is an old lady in feathers and excess make up.
its just their way
just crazy benalux guys
are people talking about it?
are people talking about it? any publicity is good publicity
love it
love it
People will get offended by
People will get offended by anything these days.
The Peter Sagan incident was
The Peter Sagan incident was in 2012?
Bloody hell.
It’s amusing to see some tweeters that are claiming to be up in arms about this. It’s probably much easier to claim the moral high ground if you aren’t using twitter to send sleazy messages to female cyclists.
Rcc, it isnt ‘sexist’…its
Rcc, it isnt ‘sexist’…its just plain sexist.
Not just bad. But wrong.
Not just bad. But wrong. Makes a joke of sexual assault. Sexist. Childish. Prurient. Small minded old git twattery.
It keeps women’s cycling in the dark ages.
But usefully makes the organisers look like inadequate, beige mac wearing Benny Hill soupy-moustache pervs who’ve never seen a lady’s bottom before or ever actually touched a girlie without running away crying or chopping her up in their basement.
Tacky, but the promotors are
Tacky, but the promotors are in the business of getting their event noticed. So on that front, score!
But at the same time bringing
But at the same time bringing disrepute to the race? Maybe not such a great score. I’m not sure all publicity really IS good publicity. In this case, I’m really not sure (I mean that literally; I am actually not sure).
Either way, I’m not a great fan of the ”it’s in someone’s interests, therefore it’s fine’ – and leave it at that’ logic. There’s a reason for almost anything. I wouldn’t feel satisfied with an explanation like; ‘you can see WHY Nigel was beaten up, can’t you? It was so that Stephen could take his lunch money’.
The promoters MIGHT profit from the whole thing, but the promoters aren’t the only people affected. Not that anyone is likely to get beaten up as a result of this; the analogy dies right there, but the posters still effectively present Sagan’s act of sexual assault as a jolly old joke that we can expect to see rolling around to have a laugh at again (“who’ll ‘squeeze’ in Harelbeke” implies someone is going to). Imagery aside, that alone is pretty gross theme to base an official promotion on.
Beautiful things make for a
Beautiful things make for a better day. If you’ve got it flaunt it I say and if you haven’t then just admire. Chapeau
Dear God ,was that butt pinch
Dear God ,was that butt pinch 3 years ago?
It was 2 years ago. Not that
It was 2 years ago. Not that that matters. At all.
Dear god, there’s some of you
Dear god, there’s some of you are defending this? Really? Have you just crawled out of the 1970s, or do you work for tabloid newspapers (pretty much the same thing)? Whilst it’s hardly the worst thing in the world, it is totally unacceptable. The organisers to grow up. Oh, and add a women’s race.
Al__S wrote:Dear god, there’s
Not defending it, just not subscribing to the endless tide of outrage that seems to pass for discussion.
The means may be different but the message is the same – one says “Look at me, I can be outrageous” the other says “Look at me, I can be outraged.” It’s all just attention-seeking.
All too often the outraged demand complete and utter agreement to their world view, whether that is right or left, car or anti-car, feminine or masculine, black or white.
As Albert Maysles said, “tyranny is the removal of nuance”. Before people get outraged about posters, twitter comments or whatever the latest casus belli is I think they should ask if they are contributing to or detracting from nuance.
abudhabiChris wrote:Al__S
You might have an argument IF this was about nuance. There is nothing nuanced about that poster or the place of women implied in it…ie women are bits of meat there for decoration, certainly not to be participants in the events themselves.
So there is no equivalence between the poster and peoples objection to it. Your argument is just the usual blahblahblah,diminishing the efforts that are made to stop the kind of crap the poster perpetuates.
robert posts child
You might have an argument IF this was about nuance. There is nothing nuanced about that poster or the place of women implied in it…ie women are bits of meat there for decoration, certainly not to be participants in the events themselves.
So there is no equivalence between the poster and peoples objection to it. Your argument is just the usual blahblahblah,diminishing the efforts that are made to stop the kind of crap the poster perpetuates.— Al__S
But there IS nuance in the place of sexualised posters in cycling/society as a whole.
I have little interest in defending what seems rather old-fashioned, and probably a case of punching down, but hysteria does not endear me to the cause of attacking it.
nuclear coffee wrote:
But
This too. I really do have some sympathy and as I said, I’m not defending the poster.
As you can tell from my username I’m in the middle east where such things are not seen in public.
I was having a discussion literally yesterday with a friend of mine, also a father of young girls, about how grating and vulgar we found a lot of public imagery and behaviour when we were in the UK in my case or Australia in his.
On the other hand most countries here are hereditary monarchies where I can live for 20 years and have no rights, and it’s a criminal offence to criticise the government.
How do you find a middle ground between imposing values and allowing free-for-all.
I’m just not sure that mob-rule by internet is the answer.
How about the concept of the
How about the concept of the sexy kiss-miss in the first place? That’s not sexist?
I don’t get the outrage… I
I don’t get the outrage… I really don’t.
I get that its a bit of a shit ad really… a bit obvious… and really rather disconnected from the race itself… but outrage?
I also have to wonder if many women spend as much time being ‘outraged’ by men being objectified on adverts?
The brutal reality is that sex sells… everywhere… using it to sell a bike race is taking that mantle to the extreme I’ll admit, but its a route they’ve followed so they will live or die by how that is received.
A couple of questions come to mind…
Is it really the race’s problem that their demographic responds to ‘sexist’ imagery?
If the ads are so despicable, how are they allowed to exist? There are advertising standards after all, and if they fell foul of advertising rules, then surely they’d be banned?
The woman in question *was*
The woman in question *was* outraged.
The race organisers seem not to give a shit.
One of these two is unacceptable.
andyp wrote:The woman in
Who was the comedian who said that the formula for good comedy was simply;
Tragedy + time = funny
Think most of you are
Think most of you are confusing the outrage of the incident with the advertising aspect. It references an event in the race’s history and they’re clearly geared up for creating slightly controversial posters which offend those who are easily offendable.
It doesn’t advocate ‘squeezing’ which would be an issue, just makes a glib reference to what Sagan did and we see about the same amount of skin as that well known tennis poster.
Long story short, you’re now talking about Harelbeke, so it’s working – you’re better off not talking about it if you are offended instead of adding to the publicity you disagree with.
I for one am outraged at
I for one am outraged at this.
I’m never going watch cycling again and I’m also going to ban my children from watching cycling, actually I’m going to ban them from riding bikes.
THAT’S HOW OUTRAGED I AM!!!!!
alternatively I just dont give a snizzle
‘Long story short, you’re now
‘Long story short, you’re now talking about Harelbeke, so it’s working’
Oh, that old chestnut. People are talking about our product, so the advertising works. They’re talking about you because they think you’re wankers and won’t buy your product. The advertising is working if the brief was ‘design an advert which will maximise the ‘shoot ourselves in the foot’ envelope’.
It’s like a nursery advertising their facilities with a picture of Jimmy Savile. Look, he’s not *actually* kiddie fiddling in the picture, so it’s OK. And everyone is talking about this nursery so – hey! well done Nathan Barley.
andyp wrote:’Long story
Were you thinking of Harelbeke before you saw the poster/headline?
Are you thinking of it now?
Then think about what the poster actually asks you and reply with ‘hopefully, no-one’.
Go on about your day/enjoy your life/etc.
I’m sure you’re aware your example is somewhat hyperbolic.
mtm_01 wrote:
Go on about
Thanks for your blessing. Hopefully I won’t come across any victims of sexual assault, that could put a bit of a damper on things. Or not, depending on your viewpoint.
And yes, I am aware that my example is somewhat hyperbolic. As is the claim that advertising works if someone is talking about it. That all depends on the *aim* of the advertising.
There are some miserable gits
There are some miserable gits here. A lot worse things happen if life. In Islam women have to wear tents and if they so much think about a man in an impure way they are stoned. They are not permitted to meet with men alone and if they do they risk being beheaded. Young girls are denied an education, denied the opportunity to ride a bike let alone drive and if they do drive they are imprisoned on spurious terrorism charges. So the miserable gits might want to consider this. Anyway I am sure the woman was paid a small fortune. It’s firmly tongue in cheek.
What exactly is sexism? All
What exactly is sexism? All i can see is what appears to be a woman with an elite level of physical appearance. I think that can apply to both sexes.
so where is the outrage about
so where is the outrage about podium girls in most sports?
Which is worse a poster about an incident that happened a couple of years ago, or having eye candy on the podium?
mrmo wrote:so where is the
Indeed. I think the eye candy on the podium can only be considered acceptable if the women’s races have the same thing going on and get their prizes presented by male models in revealing outfits.
Actually, that still wouldn’t be all that acceptable, but at least it would be a bit more balanced.
Bet you’ll all watch the race
Bet you’ll all watch the race though.
You can’t beat a bit of internet based “outrage”. Tell me, how many of you actually campaign for women’s rights or to snub out sexism? Or are you all mighty keyboard warriors?
Iamnot Wiggins wrote:Bet
I’ll take you up on that bet. Want to put any kind of sum on me watching this race (or any of the semi-classics)? Let me know and I’ll send you my bank details for the debit.
I’m not sure that one has to actively campaign against things to find them morally repugnant. If you’re not actively campaigning against infant genocide in Rwanda, for instance (show us yer banners?) I’m guessing you’re all for it?
andyp wrote:Iamnot Wiggins
I’ll take you up on that bet. Want to put any kind of sum on me watching this race (or any of the semi-classics)? Let me know and I’ll send you my bank details for the debit.
I’m not sure that one has to actively campaign against things to find them morally repugnant. If you’re not actively campaigning against infant genocide in Rwanda, for instance (show us yer banners?) I’m guessing you’re all for it?— Iamnot Wiggins
Yeah, you’ll watch them and you know you will.
As you can probably imagine, I’m not “all for” infant genocide. However, I don’t go spouting my outrage on the internet then back it up with absolutely nothing. If you were THAT outraged by it, you’d be using a bigger platform than a road bike website to decry it.
Iamnot Wiggins wrote:I don’t
Is it okay if I am not particularly “outraged” or “offended” by it – but just think it is a bit crap, not particularly helpful and not something I’d want to be associated with.
Am I allowed to comment then or do I still need a Facebook campaign?
GrahamSt wrote:Iamnot Wiggins
If that’s what you want to do then be my guest.
You’d probably get a more meaningful reaction by starting a Facebook petition in all fairness!
Iamnot Wiggins wrote:
Yeah,
a) how do you know I will watch them?? I have no intention of watching them, I no longer subscribe to Eurosport Player, and I’d rather spend my weekends riding or coaching than watching cycling on TV. You must have amazing psychic insight. Either that, or you’re completely full of shit.
b) I wouldn’t presume to imagine what you are or aren’t for. Or what you will or will not watch. That would be *really* twattish.
Anyway. what have I backed up with absolutely nothing? I am outraged by it, and have used a bigger platform than a road bike website. Twitter is bigger than Road.cc, I believe.
But you’re asuming that I haven’t. Again, I suspect you’re completely full of shit.
There’s a pattern emerging here…
andyp wrote:Iamnot Wiggins
a) how do you know I will watch them?? I have no intention of watching them, I no longer subscribe to Eurosport Player, and I’d rather spend my weekends riding or coaching than watching cycling on TV. You must have amazing psychic insight. Either that, or you’re completely full of shit.
b) I wouldn’t presume to imagine what you are or aren’t for. Or what you will or will not watch. That would be *really* twattish.
Anyway. what have I backed up with absolutely nothing? I am outraged by it, and have used a bigger platform than a road bike website. Twitter is bigger than Road.cc, I believe.
But you’re asuming that I haven’t. Again, I suspect you’re completely full of shit.
There’s a pattern emerging here…— Iamnot Wiggins
Definitely a psychic as I knew you were an utter cunt before you started typing your reply.
Dirty Belgiums, bless em.
Dirty Belgiums, bless em. Now if you’ll excuse me this is wasting my lunchtime when I could be watching re-runs of benny hill.
its been nearly 4 hours since
its been nearly 4 hours since my initial outrage.
I’m still outrage and I’ve expressed my outrage to my MP via a strongly worded letter involving capitals and explanation marks.
I’m going to keeping looking at that picture and those perfectly formed buttocks to ensure my outrage does not dissipate.
this is how mary whitehouse started you know!
Has anyone (seriously)
Has anyone (seriously) professed to being ‘outraged’ by the poster? A lot of people have stated something along the lines of ‘I think the poster is lame and tacky and tasteless and crap’, which is not really something that needs to be ‘backed up’. It’s an impression.
The supposition that people think they’ll somehow ‘end sexism’ by commenting about a poster on a bike website as ludicrous as that idea that everyone writing “HOW MUCH!?!?” under every Rapha review thinks they’ll suddenly ‘end capitalism’, or at least bring down the luxury goods sector.
If you’ve got the time, I remember an old review of a Specialized Roubaix where a lot of people thought the headtube was too tall; you could go and grill them about what campaigning they’ve done to try and end the issue of tall headtubes of bicycles.
Please state exactly what prerequisites you feel are necessary to have an opinion on this issue.
Quince wrote:Has anyone
1. Stop reading between the lines
2. Nobody is pertaining to ending sexism on a bike website – no idea where that comes from?
3. Poor, poor comparison. Try harder.
Is it OK if I’m not outraged
Is it OK if I’m not outraged by the poster but am outraged by all the people who are outraged by other people being outraged?
How dare someone express the idea that something is sexist! That’s oppression. Next they’ll be saying that pinching women’s bums is some sort of assault. Where will it all end? Also can’t we all just have a laugh? Ho ho ho.
I’ll admit this has all got a
I’ll admit this has all got a bit silly and no amount of us sending snarky comments to each other will further whatever point we were trying to make in the first place.
I’m sorry for any twisting of your words or misinterpretation I have been guilty of.
I do still think the poster is tacky and gross, but that’s not really what we ended up arguing about anyway.
At least we didn’t resort to using any of those tacky emoticons.
8> :H 8} 😀 =)) ~X(
God they’re horrible.
It’s trivialising an actual
It’s trivialising an actual sexual assault, which is why people are expressing distaste, I imagine.
If he’d done the same thing in Britain he could be on the sex offenders register, which puts it into a bit of context.
Bikebikebike wrote:
If he’d
Doubt it. Rufus Burdett pinched the bum of Sue Turton, whilst live on air on C4 News, and ended up with a police caution. No fine and no registering as a sex offender.
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/1589884.print/
I’m highly entertained by the levels of outrage being expressed by the po-faced, green-ink-writing PC Brigade on here. Get over yourselves. It’s a trivial matter and should be treated as such.
Joeinpoole wrote:Bikebikebike
Doubt it. Rufus Burdett pinched the bum of Sue Turton, whilst live on air on C4 News, and ended up with a police caution. No fine and no registering as a sex offender.
http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/1589884.print/
I’m highly entertained by the levels of outrage being expressed by the po-faced, green-ink-writing PC Brigade on here. Get over yourselves. It’s a trivial matter and should be treated as such.— Bikebikebike
Do a five second search to see if you can end up on the sex offenders register for this.
Not sure you’d be so happy if someone was groping your partner or your mum.
Bikebikebike wrote:
Do a five
Well yes, if you’re going to classify that as say ‘indecent assault’ and a court actually convicted you of it then you probably would end up on the SOR. But would that *really* happen?
I’d be surprised if my partner or my mum were to take a job as a podium girl to be honest. Sagan is well known for being a joker, was full of endorphins and the euphoria of success at the time so you basically ‘expect the unexpected’ when he gets anywhere near a podium.
Out of interest, in these days of equality, if a tipsy young lady happened to playfully pinch your lycra-clad bottom … how would you react? Would you report her to the police, want her charged with indecent assault and registered as a sex offender?
As Epictetus observed “Men are disturbed not by things, but by their opinions about them”.
Joeinpoole wrote:Bikebikebike
Well yes, if you’re going to classify that as say ‘indecent assault’ and a court actually convicted you of it then you probably would end up on the SOR. But would that *really* happen?
I’d be surprised if my partner or my mum were to take a job as a podium girl to be honest. Sagan is well known for being a joker, was full of endorphins and the euphoria of success at the time so you basically ‘expect the unexpected’ when he gets anywhere near a podium.
Out of interest, in these days of equality, if a tipsy young lady happened to playfully pinch your lycra-clad bottom … how would you react? Would you report her to the police, want her charged with indecent assault and registered as a sex offender?
As Epictetus observed “Men are disturbed not by things, but by their opinions about them”.— Bikebikebike
Its all japes and old fashioned slapstick chuckles on the last train home when some freak squeezes my wife’s bum, alone on the carriage. And worse. It happens a lot, a lot more than many men realise.
Men aren’t just intimidating. They are capable of doing, and actually do do far worse things to women than women do to men.
Women get touched up and its these insidious throw away “its only a bit of fun!” comments that tell young men its all ok. its the thin end of wedge. And unwanted sexual touching is WRONG. Its not ok, and if someone did that to my wife or my sister I’d beat the living crap out of them (also illegal for good reason, apparently, though I do enjoy a little light nose-breaking, because heh, men love it!). Because its not fun, and its their body.
Women don’t touch men up aggressively and it has an entirely different context. Men rape women. Women do not rape men. Men are aggressors. Women have more to fear. Context.
Your ancient Greek duffer (sorry, state school education) never had a hand stuck up his skirt on the train home. Or knows a few women who’ve had far worse done to them.
Try empathy. Don’t be threatened by doing the right thing. I’m sorry this needs explaining.
I’m not outraged, I’m angry and sick of people I love and respect getting violence and disrespect from those who don’t think beyond their own wants and world view.
aslongasicycle wrote:
Women
Not quite true. You must be very young if you don’t remember the Joyce McKinney case from the late 70’s for example;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_sex_in_chains_case
Technically she didn’t rape Anderson because rape by a woman on a man wasn’t actually against the law in the UK at the time. It is now.
Unfortunately there are also plenty of women who have been convicted of sex crimes against children and teenage girls and boys too. You must live a very sheltered life if you are blissfully unaware of this.
Women most certainly can be sexual aggressors.
Joeinpoole wrote:Not quite
“Very young”? There isn’t a Tour de France winner still racing who was born before the 1980s.
The fact you’ve had to go back nearly 40 years to drag up a case to support your argument speaks volumes.
I try not to comment on stories I’ve written, but really …
Simon_MacMichael
Oh I see. I didn’t know you actually have to be a TdF winner to determine whether women are capable of rape.
Are you, Simon MacMichael, completely unaware of the many recent cases of women convicted of sexual aggression? Do you need me to Google them for you or are you just about capable of doing that for yourself?
I highlighted that case because it was particularly celebrated at the time for the nature, the bizarre quotes of the accused and the fact that she got away with it. It was simply more memorable than most because of that.
Why not comment on “stories that I’ve written”? You have supposedly have done the research and therefore you should supposedly be the most informed on that story. Before writing your ‘story’ did you actually bother to contact the the designers of the poster or their customer and ask what their philosophy was? No? Didn’t think so.
Was your under-researched, provocative, one-sided, puff-piece deliberately intended to be ‘clickbait’ or was that just a happy coincidence?
I see you describe yourself as an ‘editor’ … but of what? The truth? Why not contact both sides of the story so you can provide us with a balanced report on the issue in question?
Joeinpoole wrote:
Out of
Not really a great example. Better is how would you react if you were receiving an award at work in front of all your colleagues and your (male) boss started stroking your penis through your trousers? All good fun as everyone knows he’s a touchy-feely type who’s always having a laugh. He doesn’t really mean it. I bet you’d feel really good: empowered that such a powerful man was paying you attention. You’d go home with a spring in your step that day. Haha. As Dapper Laughs probably said: “Bantz.”
I have a genuine question re.
I have a genuine question re. podium girls. On the podium of women’s races are there podium boys?
And if not, why not?
is anyone actually outraged
is anyone actually outraged or is it just media types being outraged on behalf of those who their beliefs tell them should be offended.
i remember “national outrage” at someone using “the n word” a couple of years ago (maybe luis suarez). a couple of black guys i knew couldn’t have cared less, but middle class white man on the bbc was up in arms!
Tom Boonen’s arse is looking
Tom Boonen’s arse is looking sensational.
Well, whether you like it or
Well, whether you like it or not, you’ve gotta admit the marketing team have done a pretty good job.
After all, there’s no such thing as bad publicity…apparently!
…and that’s not a cue to start a whole new thread…
http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/there-is-no-such-thing-as-bad-publicity.html
Anyways __ I think we can all
Anyways __ I think we can all agree that that is one cracking looking arse on the poster.
Far from complaining about it I’d rather be campaigning for a commemorative postage stamp in honour of it.
Wow.
Wow.
(Some) sexist men commenting
(Some) sexist men commenting on sexism. =D>
It’s got my attention.
It’s got my attention.
Here’s a thought,
Why don’t
Here’s a thought,
Why don’t those who object to pictures like these go conduct a witch hunt and locate the person who (hopefully) willingly and knowingly took her clothing off, put on those skimpy pants given to her, flashed her backside towards the camera and allowed the photo’s to be used. Instead of constantly having a go at those that look at the photo’s or print them.
May be if you stopped the modelling trade in the first place, then these photo’s would not be taken, not be published and not be looked at/ogled over or otherwise. It’s the modelling trade that is at fault at the start, not the poor sap who just happens to pass a bloody poster at the end of the process. Just in case you haven’t got the message, stop the supply.
As for what Sagan did, any inappropriate touching is out of order!
It seems to have escaped some
It seems to have escaped some people that Sagan went from bright young exciting star to embarrassing dinosaur in one afternoon when he did that. Why anyone would use the incident for promotional material is beyond me. Embarrassing.
Wow, they are getting an
Wow, they are getting an amazing amount of press on this, more then they could purchase with thrice the budget. Where are the teams on this, if they threatened to not attend until the poster was changed and an apology was issued, then we would have some real weight behind the indignation, but the teams all seem to be pretty quiet, just some fans and a few bike mags getting really vocal. I would recommend you let your teams know, as well as the UCI, that it is very hard to continue to support a sport where this kind of message is tolerated. Inform any sponsors of the race broadcast of your opinion. Cast your vote with £’s and deny the broadcaster market share and things will change pretty quick. And maybe it is about time to loose the Podium Girls, they are a bit of a throwback and might send the wrong message about the sport…
YES! We did it! Passionate
YES! We did it! Passionate voices DO change things for the better. E3 Harelbeke just been forced by UCI to withdraw sexist poster.
Never say “why bother?” Always try.
aslongasicycle wrote:YES! We
Makes you wonder why the UCI do fuck all for womens racing if they’re so quick to remove a picture of an arse.
Quote: E3 Harelbeke just been
…Good result, but the cynical among us might conclude that the purpose of the poster has been well served…