Request to Review “86 47” Product Listings for Potentially Harmful Content

[Susang6]

I am concerned about a series of product listings on the platform that feature the phrase “86 47.” While some may view this as political satire, the broader public interpretation often reads as an incitement to harm the 47th President of the United States.

As you may know, “86” is slang for “eliminate” or “get rid of,” and “47” is widely associated with President Trump. Together, this phrase is frequently understood as a coded message advocating violence—something that goes beyond humor and into territory that can incite hate.

I understand that Zazzle values creative expression. However, allowing slogans that can be construed as violent undermines the spirit of respectful dialogue and inclusive marketplace ethics. This goes against Zazzle’s stated content guidelines prohibiting hate speech or threats of violence.

I request that your team review these listings with this context in mind and consider their removal. Doing so would send a strong message that Zazzle prioritizes ethical standards and public safety over politicized messaging that can provoke real-world harm.  (I searched 8647 and there are 6000+ products) 

Thank you for your attention and commitment to maintaining a respectful and responsible platform.

[RMorganSnapshot]

After the whole "lives matter" rigamarole, only allowing things with BLM, I would think 86 47 items wouldn't be allowed. But then again..........it's who it is and let's be honest, Zazzles management seems to lean about 75+ degrees to the left so....... 

[Van]

To be fair there are still some 86 46 designs. (I was curious so I looked to see, )

[Susang6]

Thank you for checking — I appreciate the curiosity and honesty. What stands out to me is that these designs have been around for a while, yet only now, through this conversation, are we acknowledging how problematic they are.  I’m not sure why they weren’t flagged earlier, but I do believe that anything suggesting harm — like “eliminate” or “get rid of” a sitting president — crosses a line. It’s not normal, and it shouldn’t be treated as acceptable, no matter who’s in office.  Zazzle’s guidelines clearly prohibit hate speech and content that incites violence. If we see something that violates that, I think it’s worth flagging — not to silence opinion, but to help uphold the standards that make this platform safe and respectful for everyone.

[Van]

I understand your post isn't political, but a general statement about an overall issue. You used a very good example though. I write this while (I feel) remaining politically neutral.

"86" has been around for a very long time. From Merriam-Webster, "Eighty-six is slang meaning "to throw out," "to get rid of," or "to refuse service to." It comes from 1930s soda-counter slang meaning that an item was sold out. There is varying anecdotal evidence about why the term eighty-six was used, but the most common theory is that it is rhyming slang for nix." Another description/example was when someone was asked to leave or banned from a bar or pub.

Speaking for myself, even using the definition "get rid of" never once suggested harm or physical violence. I took it to mean vote someone out or impeach.

I have to wonder if this particular issue has been fed/fueled by media - think of the shells on sand not so long ago and the hoopla that ended up causing. Had that photo been posted by someone with zero political affiliations would there have been such a stir?

"86" was used the same way about the previous President but never seemed to be a problem. There are still a few designs up with "86 46." ******There are also some still up for 44 and 45......****** as well. 

TBH, this seems like one of those gray areas to me and that has to be rough for Z and other pods to wrangle with. A lot of things are about perception - anything can be twisted and turned into something not intended. At what point does cancelling something that only 'might' be seen by some in a disturbing way become a free speech/expression or censorship issue.

Just something to think about.

[Susang6]

As a former business owner, I always believed in staying neutral. I welcomed everyone into my restaurants, regardless of background or belief, and avoided anything political, religious, or divisive. That approach built trust — and I still hold that neutrality is the best path for any business that wants to serve a broad and respectful community.

This isn’t about censorship or cancel culture. It’s about setting a standard that says: we don’t condone messaging that even suggests harm, no matter who it targets. That’s not political — it’s ethical. And it’s good business.

[Susang6]

I understand that “86” has a long history as slang — from cancel culture to political protest — but it actually began in restaurant lingo, where I come from. In food service, “86” means an item is out of stock or being removed from the menu. It also came to mean refusing service or asking someone to leave the premises.

That’s part of why I see things differently when “86” gets paired with “47” — a number referring directly to the sitting president. Even if someone intends it to mean “impeach” or “vote out,” the perception — especially in today’s volatile environment — can shift toward something more hostile.

For platforms like Zazzle, I think the question shouldn’t just be about slang history or user intent, but about how these slogans land publicly. When ambiguity tips into language that could be interpreted as inciting harm — especially toward public figures — it becomes more than clever wordplay. It becomes an ethical concern. And for businesses, perception matters.

[MOM]

@Van @Susang6  I’m so thankful how you phrased this because it is exactly how I feel (although I’m not politically neutral). I was working in bars in my past and I have 86ed some folks - never would I have associated my action with anything violent. To me “86 47” is not equal to “Alligator Alcatraz” merchandise and I’m sorry that it implies more drastic measures than just someone “showing the door” or that it encourages more drastic actions for some people which is of course totally wrong. To me “86 47” is more like “Dump Trump” signage and no normal person would go out and shoot the president after seeing such a message. But the world is going literally insane nowadays (or does history just repeat it self?). So I can see both sides, kinda.

[Susang6]

I appreciate your perspective and the way you’ve shared it. I also come from a restaurant background, so I’m familiar with the original meaning of “86” — removing an item from the menu or asking someone to leave. But when it’s paired with “47,” referring to a sitting president, the meaning shifts.

Even if the intent isn’t violent, the perception — especially in today’s climate — can be. We’ve seen four confirmed assassination attempts on President Trump, and that reality makes slogans like “86/47” far from lighthearted. It’s not about assuming what a “normal person” would do — it’s about acknowledging that not everyone is balanced, and public messaging matters.

I also want to gently say that comparisons to things like “Alligator Alcatraz” feels like a separate issue. That kind of rhetoric has sparked its own controversy, and I don’t believe it belongs in this conversation. My concern is focused on Zazzle’s role in allowing products that could be interpreted as inciting harm — and how that reflects on the platform’s ethics and inclusivity.

I’m not here to censor anyone’s views. I’m here to ask whether we, as a creative community, are comfortable normalizing language that could be misread in dangerous ways. That’s not political — it’s about responsibility.

[PenguinPower]

I will suggest not so gently that demonizing a whole class of people with nasty racist memes like Alligator Alcatraz is FAR WORSE and far more damaging to the fabric of our society...  

I am in full agreement with MOM that the phrase has not to this point been anything like violent rhetoric. Trump supporters gleefully used it quite often as 8646 for 4 years, but suddenly it became so sensitive... hypocrisy. As far as the current climate - I'll also remind you the president that received the most death threats recorded was Obama... 

[Susang6]

I’d just like to clarify something mentioned earlier: while past presidents including President Obama absolutely received serious threats, President Trump has been the target of four confirmed assassination attempts, which changes the context entirely.

That’s part of why slogans like “86/47” aren’t just edgy they’re potentially dangerous. Even if not everyone reads them as violent, they land differently in a world where public figures face real threats.  I’m not looking to politicize the conversation. I’m asking whether we, as a creative community and platform, are comfortable selling products that could be misread by the wrong person especially when they reference individuals who’ve already faced targeted violence. That’s not a stretch. It’s a matter of ethical responsibility.

[ColsCreations]

I’m asking whether we, as a creative community and platform, are comfortable selling products that could be misread by the wrong person especially when they reference individuals who’ve already faced targeted violence. That’s not a stretch. It’s a matter of ethical responsibility.

As a member of said creative community and platform, I am uncomfortable with censorship running amok just because someone somewhere might misread something. Where does it stop? Do we also take out all the various "Resist!" designs featuring a raised fist? That suggests violence. How about "Joyful Warrior"? Warrior by definition suggests violence. How about "Never Forget Jan 6"? That could be taken two very different ways, and could also be considered in bad taste and insensitive of 9/11. I saw a lot of designs tonight that aren't even political that could be construed as supporting violence. "heavily armed & very pi_ed" and "keep calm and, nevermind, burn it down!" as example.  Do you feel that Zazzle has an ethical responsibility to remove all these such type designs too, or is it just ones you may perhaps just take personal issue with?

A truly great library has something to offend everyone

[Susang6]

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I respect the importance of creative freedom and share your concern about the dangers of over-censorship. However, my issue with the phrase "86 47" isn’t rooted in symbolic metaphor or political expression it’s about safety.

This particular phrase is widely understood as a call to "eliminate" a living individual, who has now survived multiple assassination attempts. That’s no longer abstract satire it’s language tangled with real harm.

I’m not suggesting we police every bold slogan or passionate message. "Resist!" and "Joyful Warrior" are empowering for many. But when language overlaps with specific threats and documented violence, we as a community have to ask: is this protecting creative freedom, or neglecting ethical responsibility?  It’s not about politics it’s about principle. If Zazzle was willing to remove satirical alligator merch out of concern for dehumanization, I believe that consistency means reviewing phrases like this too. I’m simply advocating for neutrality, safety, and compassion in how we express ourselves.

[Barbara]

Anything a person says can be interpreted by listeners to mean whatever way of thinking they personally have. Such is the case when James Comey thoughtlessly posted his photo of shells in the sand with the result being some rather extreme interpretations. Given those extreme interpretations and their current prevalence, it's unseemly for Zazzle to permit the usage of 8647 on products. Period.

Colorwash's Home    Colorwash on Benable   Benable invite link

[PenguinPower]

The difference here, than in the case of other things - like Pepe the Frog or the OK hand gesture, that have come to have nefarious alternate meanings, is that it's not the people who have been using the phrase who have been shifting the meaning.... but rather the group it's been directed at intentionally hyping the most extreme interpretations to create a problem that didn't previously exist... Is Matt Gaetz now admitting when he tweeted that he'd 86'd House Speaker Kevin McCarthy that his intent was to murder him? Of course not. Are all of those who posted/wrote 8646 saying they were actually calling for the assassination of Biden? I doubt it. 

This is manufactured outrage and it's unfortunately a pretty effective way to censor things as it really is quite difficult to argue on the one hand that some things truly are offensive and should be offensive to everyone, while other things should remain alright, even as some express outrage. 

[Susang6]

I agree with you  it’s a reminder that our words and visuals exist within a larger cultural lens, whether we intend them to or not. James Comey’s post is a powerful example of how something symbolic can suddenly take on unintended meaning, simply because of the climate it’s released into.  That’s exactly why I believe Zazzle should take a closer look at products featuring “8647.” In another era, the phrase might have been interpreted as political satire or slang. But in this moment  when four confirmed assassination attempts have already targeted the individual it references  the implications are harder to ignore.  These are delicate conversations, and I’m grateful for voices like yours helping shift the focus toward thoughtful responsibility rather than political friction. There’s room for expression and creativity, absolutely  but also room for reflection when public messaging walks the line between clever and dangerous.

[Barbara]

When I was growing up (Medieval times), there was a rule that we not speak of politics or religion with anyone other than family because these were bound to lead to conflict. It worked well, but somehow it withered away and has been replaced by the notion that free speech means we've the right to insult, shut down, and even harm others. Zazzle shouldn't ever step away from its old-fashioned guidelines.

Colorwash's Home    Colorwash on Benable   Benable invite link

[Susang6]

Thank you for sharing that, Barbara. I grew up in a strict military household, where manners, humility, and the unspoken rule to “never discuss politics or religion outside the family” were part of daily life. That kind of upbringing stays with you it taught me to think before speaking,  to choose quiet when it felt wiser, and to lead with respect even in disagreement. I share your concern that free speech has sometimes shifted toward hostility rather than understanding. My goal here wasn’t to ignite conflict or make anything political it was to raise a quiet concern about language that carries a very real weight in today's world.  If we lose the ability to talk about hard things with care, we risk giving up the kind of thoughtful dialogue that communities like Zazzle were built to protect. I still believe we’re capable of navigating those spaces with grace  and voices like yours make that feel possible.

[ColsCreations]

Now that certain specifics have been openly mentioned, there is no way to voice further or countering opinions without things turning ugly. We're all adults, I think we all have seen how internet discussions like this spin out of control. I think this whole thread needs to be 86'ed before it causes needless friction in our happy little design community here. There's a reason political discussions don't belong here.

[Susang6]

I understand your desire to protect the peace here, but I believe shutting down conversations simply because they involve uncomfortable truths is more harmful than helpful.  My comments weren’t political they were grounded in ethics and safety. When a phrase overlaps with real-world violence, especially following multiple assassination attempts on a living public figure, ignoring that context isn’t neutrality. It’s avoidance.

If we’re not willing to have difficult conversations  the kind that ask platforms to act responsibly and consistently  then I think we’re letting fear silence integrity. I spoke up with care. I stand by that.

[Susang6]

I agree that “Alligator Alcatraz” is a deeply troubling slogan. it's been criticized for dehumanizing immigrants and raising serious environmental and humanitarian implications.  That said, I believe the conversation changes when we look at “86/47.” This phrase, exists in a climate where real-world threats against public figures have occurred.  I’m not looking to compare or rank one slogan as more harmful than another. both raise ethical concerns. But I think it’s worth asking whether Zazzle, as a platform, is comfortable hosting product designs that any group might reasonably interpret as promoting harm, regardless of intent.

[Susang6]

 You mention that zazzle is 75+ degrees to the left.  They could be BUT This isn’t about political affiliation — it’s about community standards and shared responsibility. There have been four confirmed assassination attempts on the current President of the United States. That fact alone underscores how dangerous it is to normalize 86/47, even when framed as protest.  Regardless of who someone supports or opposes, Zazzle’s policies should apply evenly. Slogans like “86/47” cross a line — not because of who they target, but because of what they imply. Hate speech and calls to violence shouldn’t have a place in our creative space. I believe Zazzle can do better in upholding its guidelines and fostering a respectful environment for all.

[Barbara]

What on earth has happened to morals?

Colorwash's Home    Colorwash on Benable   Benable invite link

[PenguinPower]

Funny , I didn't see you complaining from 2020 to 2024 about all the 86 46 designs... 

[Susang6]

I appreciate your comment — and I understand that not everyone finds these products personally upsetting. What concerns me more is the broader question: why do we think it's okay to overlook content that implies harm or violence, even subtly for any president / anyone?

Zazzle’s own Content Guidelines  state that hate speech, threats, and discriminatory or violent messaging are not permitted. That includes slogans that suggest “getting rid of” someone, regardless of political affiliation.

This isn’t about who the product targets — it’s about the message it sends and the precedent it sets. If we agree that inciting harm has no place here, then it’s worth asking why some designs slip through without being flagged. I believe we all share a responsibility to help uphold the standards that make Zazzle a safe and respectful space for creativity.

[CrazyMermaid]

Then why didn't you post the same outrage about 86 46? If you did and I missed it I apologize for the question. 

[Susang6]

I appreciate the question, but I think it’s important to clarify: this isn’t about selective outrage or political sides. It’s about recognizing that any messaging — whether it’s “86/46,” “86/47,” or anything else that implies harm — doesn’t belong on a platform that claims to prohibit hate speech and incitement.

What concerns me most is that these products have existed for years, and only now — after this conversation — are they being acknowledged as problematic. That raises a deeper question: why weren’t they flagged earlier? Why did we, as a community, accept them as normal?

I don’t believe it’s any one person’s responsibility to catch everything. But when we do see something that crosses a line, I think it’s worth speaking up — not to point fingers, but to help uphold the standards we all benefit from

[Connie]

@PenguinPower perceptions change over time, mostly driven by the media, I think. I never even saw anything about 86/ 46, (or 86/ 45, or any other number) but after a certain gaffe by a politician that blew up in the media, suddenly the phrase has a violent connotation. It's sort of like how the Confederate battle flag was allowed on Zazzle and other sites for many years with no problems, until a murdering psychopath was associated with it and then it was banned, even in an historical context.