Forum search & shortcuts

Sense of Humour not...
 

[Closed] Sense of Humour not present here

Posts: 52609
Free Member
Topic starter
 
[#510852]

The list of complaints is more of a worry than any of [url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8020881.stm ]these ads[/url]


 
Posted : 29/04/2009 1:26 am
 SST
Posts: 5
Free Member
 

What gets me is the phrasing they use. I'm not sure whether the things listed are what the complainers actually said, or if the reporters are just summing things up that way.

For example with the ad about child abuse, I would expect to hear "I saw this ad, I was abused as a child, this ad therefore upset me" or "my children saw this ad, they are not abused but are now upset to think that other children less fortunate than them might be being abused, and are having nightmares about it" Both are quite logical and reasonable complaints (IMO),from people actully effected, regarding what was clearly an emmotive advert.

The way its being reported though is like this:

[i]"Many of the 840 complainants were concerned with the imagery of abuse and drug use, especially because the ads were being shown at times when children could be watching"[/i]

So does this mean that their own children were not affected (maybe they don't even have children) but thay are complaining on behalf of any children who [i]may[/i] have seen the ad and [i]may[/i] have been affected by it?

Likewise,

[i]Some other viewers, who reported they had been abused as children, asked whether the imagery could upset some people who had suffered such treatment [/i]

If they're "asking" then it's a question not a complaint? They are saying that they were abused, they are not saying that because of this fact they were upset by the ad, but they are asking whether people who were abused could be upset by the ad?

I guess this is the biggest problem I have with this sort of thing - people complaining "on behalf" of other people. "Such and such a group/gender/race could be offended by this or that, although I personally am not in this instance"

(In some cases of course you would want someone to complain on behalf of someone else who may not be able to complain themselves, but surly in the majority of cases people CAN speak for themselves?)


 
Posted : 29/04/2009 9:21 am
Posts: 13591
Full Member
 

Remember the Ross/Brand thing? Something like 12 complaints at the time followed by 63 million after the papers told everyone to be offended


 
Posted : 29/04/2009 9:34 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

What a bunch of sad dicks....


 
Posted : 29/04/2009 10:01 am
Posts: 6
Free Member
 

I hardly saw any of those, but now wish I had seen the "overtly sexual" one for Orangina... 🙂

(Personally, I think Ross/Brand is different. I have no problem with someone complaining on principle. It was more to do with people being offended at the idea of the BBC uncritically paying vast sums of money to unfunny bullying cretins. But we've been over that ad nauseam. 😐 )


 
Posted : 29/04/2009 10:07 am
Posts: 31206
Full Member
 

The Orangina one is on YouTube. It was quite odd and definitely has sexual overtones. But then so do most ads.


 
Posted : 29/04/2009 10:10 am
Posts: 35100
Full Member
 

The Orangina advert was a bit weirdly sexual it has to be said. It's the only one of those adverts that I found remotely "odd". Complaining that a Specsavers advert trivialises Edith Piaf suggests to me that some folk have too much time on their hands though...


 
Posted : 29/04/2009 10:56 am
Posts: 6
Free Member
 

Do you reckon people troll the ASA? 🙂

Mind, the Piaf complaint is interesting. Can you imagine anyone trying to run a campaign in which they dubbed footage of Princess Di for comic effect? That would be a surefire complaint record I suspect.


 
Posted : 29/04/2009 10:59 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

just watched the orangina ad as i've not seen it before and i have to say i thought it was excellent.


 
Posted : 29/04/2009 11:26 am
Posts: 13591
Full Member
 

[i]dubbed footage of Princess Di for comic effect?[/i]

Now how do I get an advert of Lady Di promoting the Big Bike Bash with the tag line 'What could possibly go wrong?' before disappearing down a tunnel in Paris?


 
Posted : 29/04/2009 12:02 pm
Posts: 35100
Full Member
 

[i]Do you reckon people troll the ASA? [/i]

Got to worth a punt, I reckon. Suggest an Ad that I can be morally outraged by, and I'll see if I can get it withdrawn.

Offended of Northants


 
Posted : 29/04/2009 1:43 pm
Posts: 41874
Free Member
 

some of the techno techno techno stuff on STW?


 
Posted : 29/04/2009 3:27 pm
Posts: 30656
Free Member
 

The Orangina one was just weird. To think that someone pitched it and then got the greenlight and then got paid makes my head hurt.

Not offensive tho.


 
Posted : 29/04/2009 3:30 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

i love the bit about the highway code and the dog in the front seat. you can just see someone sitting down with their camomile tea and almost spitting it out whilst viewing the televisual blashpemy peddled by Volkswagen....


 
Posted : 29/04/2009 3:41 pm
Posts: 151
Free Member
 

just watched the orangina ad as i've not seen it before and i have to say i thought it was excellent.

Just what is a pole dancing octopus doing in a forest? I'm going to complain. The poor thing can't breathe.


 
Posted : 29/04/2009 3:56 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

that f*cking gorilla playing the drums should have been complained about - no point to that whatsoever


 
Posted : 29/04/2009 4:24 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I do like the fact that none of the 10 most complained about ads had the complaints upheld (although 1 was voluntarily withdraw).
At least ASA isn't pandering to these whingers.


 
Posted : 29/04/2009 4:30 pm