The Royals unveils new 'Say No to No' site

Screen Shot 2017-09-11 at 10.54.15 am.jpgOff the back of The Royals' 'Say No to No' launch in August, the agency has followed up with a newly launched website created by AKQA.

Says Nick Cummins, creative partner, The Royals: "We now have close to 2000 individuals and companies that have signed up to Say No To No. This shows that our industry truly does have a soul. Together, we've taken a stand against making harmful or hurtful messages and at the same time shown our LGBTIQ colleagues that we respect and support them.
"Our brand spanking new website comes with extra functionality thanks to the team at AKQA. And it's awesome. Check out the searchable list and remind those friends or colleagues who aren't there to sign up. Also have a read of some to the reasons why we as an industry have chosen to say No to No.

Website: AKQA
Alisia Muscat
Brian Vella
Ben Robertson
Natalie Haslam-Conroy
Rachel Ferguson
Aaron Vella
Danielle Rijs
Nick Taras
Lindsay Lim
Michael Black
PiaLyck Festersen

20 Comments said:

Stop free speech?


We are better than that

twinkle said:

I hate to be negative because I think we should all be creating stuff to help the yes vote, but is this really going to change the behaviour of No voters? It seems to be just talking to people who are already voting yes... so it kinda fails strategically for me.

Amateur hour said:

This TV spot is incredibly naive and is likely to hurt the 'Yes' vote more than help it. Did anyone stop to consider how the 'No' contingent might use this to reinforce their accusations of their free speech being repressed.

Wow said:

Such a worthy idea, destroyed by an advert which is as bad as the 'no' campaign. Stopping debate is the best way of turning people off.

I applaud the ambition, but just shows that the message, communication and idea is so important, and they missed it. Massively.

Matt said:

Love the spot, well done.

I don't get why creative agencies need to partner with other creative agencies in order to produce simple websites. But anyway, nice work all involved.

Just great... said:

A campaign crushing free speech and people's right to their own opinion.
As hard as it is to understand for some, just because you don't agree with someone's personal point of view, doesn't make that point of view wrong.

Really? said:

This Say No to No campaign has done more to hurt the yes vote than help it.
Once again Nick sprouts his 'stand up to hurtful and harmful' messages.
Well Nick, here's some news for you.
I support the yes cause but know good and decent people who don't support SSM because of genuinely held religious and/or philosophical beliefs. They're not homophobes, they just don't believe in SSM.
I don't agree with their views, but I respect them.
As Voltaire ( roughly) once said, 'I don't agree with what you say but I will defend with my life your right to say it'.
It's a pity that more on the Yes side didn't appreciate that respectful persuasion would achieve much more from those who can and need to be persuaded than simply more of this counter-productive 'Say no to no' campaign.
You are doing the Yes cause a disservice.

Yeah no said:

This is just going to make those on the fence feel bullied, and then vote for NO.


What is writing your name on a petition going to do to get more yes votes? That is the overall goal isn't it?

Being a clicktivist wont do shit. Want to make a difference? Get out there and convert a no voter.

Here's a list of things that you could do that help more than signing your name on this damn wanky honour roll.

- Call your Nan and change her vote.
- Door-knock.
- Do your own letter-box drop.
- Fill out a form and post it for someone who might miss the deadline.
- Steal your homophobey next-door-neighbours' mail.

Come on advertising people, put your heads together and do better than this.

Opposite day said:

This will make people say YES to NO.

BS said:


People have used religious and philosophical arguments to defend all kinds of atrocitious behaviour and beliefs for thousands of years.

I defend a person's right to hold whatever views they like and they're also entitled to defend those views on whatever basis they concocte.

But make no mistake, if they're views are inherently homophobic, then they are, by virtue, homophobic. I know that's a tough pill for some people to swallow, but that's just a bloody fact. Choosing to disown the label "homophobe" doesn't absolve you of its meaning.

Racism amongst countless other forms of discrimination was defended in exactly the same way. Lots of hardworking, "decent" people, like my grandparents wouldn't call themselves racists at all. But what you call yourself is irrelevant.

So don't tell me or anyone else to tolerate homophobia, because, like, you know, they're really decent well meaning people.

Armchair said:

I always thought somebody should do something about that.

And then I realised I was somebody.

Dear BS @5:47am said:

So, a person who opposes SSM on religious grounds is homophobic?

Dear Dear BS said:

A religious person who opposes on religious grounds isn't necessarily homophobic - just uneducated. They should be aware that Australia allows civil weddings that religion has no role or say in. How would they like it if a religion (other than their own) dictated their rights?

Dear Dear BS @2:20pm said:

So, they're not homophobic, just uneducated? Interesting.

Left right out said:

The left is doing a fantastic job campaigning for NO.

Voltaire said: said:

I never said that!

Honestly said:

All the haters keep saying this is about censoring free speech or what not. Da fuq are you on about. This is a bunch of adults saying 'we won't work on bs public-facing content'. That's it.

For those who disagree with SSM because of their religious or philosophical beliefs, yknow what? Get a grip on fucking reality. My equal rights as a real-life human being should legally outweigh your mystical fairy tales and middle-class 'what-ifs'. What a load of horse bullocks.

This whole thing is a morbid waste of everyone's energies. Good on the Royals for creating the campaign and showing some solidarity.

Dear Honestly @9:47pm said:

No. Its not 'a bunch of adults saying 'we won't work on bs public-facing content'.
Its a bunch of adults saying 'don't have anything to do with an opposing POV on SSM'.
That's the 'fucking reality'.

twinkle said:

@honestly, most of these comments are responding to a film that has since been taken down. It featured No campaigners literally being silenced by a pair of hands.

Leave a comment