LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksits not a patch on the "Spam Up" advert though
its not a patch on the "Spam Up" advert though
What, and ignore companies actively harming the environment? Not let people know which companies those are? That's just ridiculous. Informed choices include an informed choice to avoid buying from such companies, which is difficult to do if no-one tells you who they are.Originally Posted by TeePee
I just read that as
"which is difficult to do if no-one tells you who to give your money too"
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
It's not informed. There is no reason why you should avoid that specific company.
They should stick to advice which agrees with their message of choice influenceing change, rather than a petty boycott which goes totally against that argument.
Actually, there are lots of reasons; I take it that you didn't read the link. Their advert is polemical - they're trying to influence the choices that you make, and I'd suppose that their argument would be that they would like you to choose to join their boycott of Esso. Yours appears to be that the reason for making an advert has nothing to do with trying to influence people at all. Presumably, then, Esso's marketing and PR millions are spent on an utterly non-partisan apolitical attempt to inform people. And it never rains in Belgium. They'd argue (and I'd have to say that they have a point) that if there is a company which is so utterly inimical to the idea of preserving our world, so dedicated to the pursuit of profit that they will spend millions trying to drown out good science in a wave of static, that presents in and of itself a clear and present danger to our continued existence, then a boycott of that company is anything BUT petty.
Nothing in their advert conflicts with their message; they want you to choose to influence change by changing your buying habits, and from their point of view (and they're the ones making the advert) one of the easiest and simplest changes to implement would be to stop buying Esso's products. If enough people did that, then Esso might actually change themselves. Seems like a plan to me.
They also name other companies that they would like you to avoid, and suggest a number of products that they would like you to buy.
Frankly, you're starting to sound like someone whose nearest and cheapest petrol station happens to have a tiger poster on it and you just don't like being challenged about that.
Last edited by nichomach; 05-02-2006 at 02:00 AM.
I didn't read the link, I watched the advert.
The advert is about trying to get people to make informed choices. Naming companies at the end isn't informing people. It doesn't help them make informed choices. What they should do is simply say 'More information at 'www.greenpeace.com'' and have information about the companies there. Saying 'Boycott xxx' isn't helpful.
My nearest petrol station is Shell, may I have your permission to go there?
I've not asked you to stop going anywhere, I've simply pointed out that it's a valid part of Greenpeace's message to ask you not to.
So, it's alright in your book for a company to say "buy our petrol", but not OK for Greenpeace to say"if you buy that company's petrol, then you're helping a particularly bad company damage the environment". It's alright for Greenpeace to make wishy-washy general pronouncements about not damaging the environment as long as they don't get specific and actually ask people to take concrete steps. Frankly, you're applying a ludicrous and breathtakingly hypocritical double-standard.
As oppsed to what they actually do, which is ask you to not buy from a number of companies and give the URL for their website so that you can find further information as to why? The point of advertising is to persuade people to follow a particular course of action; "buy our petrol/catfood/car/life insurance/whatever". What you're essentially saying is that it's OK for Greenpeace to use advertising so long as they don't use it for what it is explicitly there to do. That's beyond dumb. Are you going to demand that Esso ads now feature balanced, informed reportage? "Hey, buy our petrol! By the way, here's a list of the front organizations that we support to oppose action on global warming, and here's a list of our last few environmental cock-ups. Oh, and BP are cheaper." Unless you're demanding that, you simply don't have a case.
Last edited by nichomach; 05-02-2006 at 02:51 PM.
It's a different message.
The choice influences change is a good message. The course of action is to change spending habbits by making an informed decision of the companies you use.
Boycott Esso (or any company) for no reason is a bad message. It doesn't help you make an informed choice. If they had another advert, or supplied information about why you should boycott Esso, then fine, but they aren't doing that. They aren't informing anyone, and this contradicts the informed choice message.
They do provide information. They give their URL and I even posted you a direct ****ing link to the information on their website regarding Esso. Frankly, your assertion that they aren't informing anyone is unadulterated crap, pure and simple; if you can't be bothered to click on a link, one questions whether you'd want to be informed in the first place. They make clear their position and they give you the ability to find further information as to why they hold that position.
This John West Salmon advert was/remains one of the funniest adverts ever made IMO
There is no information in the advert. I'm not arguing if esso are a good or bad company. I'm just saying it defeats the purpose of having an advert advocating choice if they don't actually want you to make a choice, but to go blindly along with what they say.
I try to be informed about everything as possible. I question wether you want to be infotrmed about anything, or if you just blindly follow everything you see in an advert.
The advert is advocating that you make certain specific choices - that's what adverts do, and that's what its purpose is; and if you want more information as to why, they tell you the address of their website. If you were trying that hard to be informed you might have visited the website, the address of which is included in the advert. The difference between us is that I bothered to do that. So who exactly was trying to be informed?
The advert advocates making informed choice. Thats the purpose of the majority of the advert, and it's a good message.
Then they change the message and say you must do something, defeating the object of the first part.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote