Radiation by Fiona Rae

Read Post

Radiation: Desperate Heroes

95 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last

  • Joanna,

    Family First said Cadbury, Ferrit, Burger King, CRC and Finish had asked that their ads not be shown during the programme...

    Um, wtf, Burger King? You wanna talk about really offensive content on television? Have you seen your ads lately?

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 746 posts Report Reply

  • Bob Munro,

    Yes - They didn't want their bouncing boobs associated with Californication's bouncing boobs.

    Christchurch • Since Aug 2007 • 418 posts Report Reply

  • Bob Munro,

    ...and as for that creepy character that fronts Ferrit. I wouldn't leave him alone in a room with young children.

    Christchurch • Since Aug 2007 • 418 posts Report Reply

  • Joanna,

    ...and as for that creepy character that fronts Ferrit. I wouldn't leave him alone in a room with young children.

    That's okay, I have a nice special place all prepared for him already. And I'm 27 so it's alright...

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 746 posts Report Reply

  • Bob Munro,

    Not here I hope.

    Christchurch • Since Aug 2007 • 418 posts Report Reply

  • Joanna,

    More like here

    Wellington • Since Nov 2006 • 746 posts Report Reply

  • Bob Munro,

    Really! Those marketers, they know their onions. And here I was thinking because he put me off everyone else would be the same. There's always another way of looking at things out there.

    Christchurch • Since Aug 2007 • 418 posts Report Reply

  • Bob Munro,

    Anyway thanks Joanna for helping me crack the ton. I think RB's system has been infected with the same problems as The Herald's poll.

    Christchurch • Since Aug 2007 • 418 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    On a related note, Family First and the catholic church really, really want you to watch Californication. Why else would they put out a press release about perverted sex & drug use in it?

    And anyone who thinks Californication is kewl - let alone lets their kiddie winkles watch - has no taste, no mind and serious issues that didn't start when the TV went on. It's painfully obvious that every cable network is looking for the next Sopranos, Deadwood or The Wire__, but they've really got to bring a little more to the table than juvenile provocation.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • InternationalObserver,

    okay, since I've been so rude about TV3 pulling it, I suppose I should publicise it's return: TV3 is resuming 30 Rock. New eps start tonite (thurs) at 10.05pm after Californication. Here's a link to a funny bit starring Al Gore

    And speaking of Californication and the Advertiser Ban driven by Family First ....

    Are we going to accept this? Seriously, I thought this sort of thing only happened in the US? This is a show that screens at 9.30pm! And they've successfully convinced advertisers to pull their advertising. If we allow Family First's action to go unchecked, what next? Will & Grace?

    While I accept that in a democracy anyone should be allowed to start a boycott, I also think it should be possible to challenge that boycott. Maybe we should boycott those advertisers too timid to stand up to Family First?

    I'd suggest picking on one and would suggest it should be Burger King. I think it's hipocritical of them to suggest that the show is too controversial when some of their own advertising has been viewed in the same light. They won't pull those campaigns but they will pull advertising from a show screening in an adult timeslot??

    What do PAS readers think? Am I right, or am I Don Quixote?

    Since Jun 2007 • 909 posts Report Reply

  • Kyle Matthews,

    What do PAS readers think? Am I right, or am I Don Quixote?

    You're right. Feel free to be Don Quixote if you want, I don't mind what you do in the privacy of your own home.

    Since Nov 2006 • 6243 posts Report Reply

  • Bob Munro,

    Nice little editorial in The Press this morning on it all.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/thepress/4273211a24077.html

    Christchurch • Since Aug 2007 • 418 posts Report Reply

  • Heather Gaye,

    From that editorial:

    The complainants have every right in a free society to express their opposition to the show. But in demanding that companies pull advertising slots during the programme, and several have done so, or that viewers boycott TV3 altogether, they go too far.

    Gone too far? For crying out loud, it's not censorship, it's market economics. If family first have the irate numbers to convince companies that sponsoring the show is going to affect profits, then more power to them.

    With that in mind, I/O's suggestion of counter-protest is perfectly appropriate. I will refuse to eat burger king until they stop being strong-armed by other-group-with-which-I-vehemently-disagree. That works out for me because I was already refusing to eat burger king after they screened those stupid lame ads. Which also worked out for me because I don't eat burger king anyway.

    Morningside • Since Nov 2006 • 533 posts Report Reply

  • Kyle Matthews,

    Which also worked out for me because I don't eat burger king anyway.

    No that'll never work, your boycott is completely ineffective.

    Start eating it, briefly. Then stop. And write letters to them telling them so. They'll feel the cut in their profits and link it to your letter and wham. They'll be demanding Duchovney receive oral sex from a nun _while_ eating a whopper burger.

    Since Nov 2006 • 6243 posts Report Reply

  • Andy Milne,

    <complete sidetrack>

    Good news: I've just discovered TV1 have picked up the new series of Hustle from the UK.

    Bad news: They've buried it at 11pm on a Tuesday! Bah. Wassamatter, not enough home renovation/psychic crime-solvers/treasure islands in it?

    Christchurch • Since Aug 2007 • 59 posts Report Reply

  • InternationalObserver,

    Yeah, I've been watching the new Hustle but somehow I'm not so enamoured this series....

    .... I've just come across this clip which effectively skewers FOX News for their use of sex to sell the news. Bikini and breast shots during a serial killer report? How long before NZ TV follows suit?

    I found the clip thru this blog
    on Huffington Post. It makes some great points, including:

    Their credibility is in tatters, particularly because of the way they've pimped the Iraq war. So the cheapest way to get viewers back is through gratuitous titillation. We've seen it through the wall to wall blondes and babes delivering the news, but the graphic video and interviews they air takes it to a whole new level.

    Women who choose to flaunt their sexuality is one thing, but clipping together images to parade before Fox audiences completely out of context is another. Asking a woman in trouble (because of lame pictures on the web) about non-existent lesbian trysts is insulting. Prodding her over and over again is mindless sexism at its worst.

    Since Jun 2007 • 909 posts Report Reply

  • Russell Brown,

    Gone too far? For crying out loud, it's not censorship, it's market economics. If family first have the irate numbers to convince companies that sponsoring the show is going to affect profits, then more power to them.

    Ah, but Family First doesn't have the numbers: it's Bob McCroskie and a mailing list.

    Its sway lies in the amazing level of media buy-in that McCroskie's been able to spin out of the exposure he got in the smacking debate. He's a risible rentaquote, and the news media are hiring.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 22849 posts Report Reply

  • InternationalObserver,

    Excellent point RB. A pity our media didn't ask these advertisers why they were bowing to this pressure. Instead they chose to report it as controversy!! So yes, MSM print journalism is out the window, replaced by delivering consumers to advertisers.

    Since Jun 2007 • 909 posts Report Reply

  • Craig Ranapia,

    Are we going to accept this? Seriously, I thought this sort of thing only happened in the US? This is a show that screens at 9.30pm! And they've successfully convinced advertisers to pull their advertising. If we allow Family First's action to go unchecked, what next? Will & Grace?

    Well, I've actually written to the Herald asking why Family First apparently had no objection whatsoever to the screening of the episode of Rescue Me where Tommy rapes his ex-wife. And perhaps my priorities are FUBAR, but can we expect a tidal wave of whore-banging, cock-snorting, puppy-killing, grenade-posting, kidnap your stripper-hiring teenager, beat you fiance to death with a kitsch bookend and dump his corpse in the bathtub as Damages continues its run? Damn, that show is eeevil, and I'm not just taking about Glenn Close in full uber-bitch mode...

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 12370 posts Report Reply

  • Graeme Edgeler,

    TV1 have picked up the new series of Hustle

    Yeah, it followed on from repeats of the third season. With TV Guide still listing it as a (R) repeat!

    somehow I'm not so enamoured this series

    Neither. The episodes I've seen (and I've not seen them all), have been a little less "fun" than earlier seasons.

    And Bring back Micky!

    Wellington, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 3215 posts Report Reply

  • Ben Austin,

    I guess one man can only watch so much sexy tv before he goes mad with moral rage, right?

    But seriously though, picket Burger King, I want to see you guys in the Oddly Enough section of the foreign newspapers.

    London • Since Nov 2006 • 1027 posts Report Reply

  • Emma Hart,

    Ah, but Family First doesn't have the numbers: it's Bob McCroskie and a mailing list.

    But that is more than what the pissed-off Liberals have managed, I/O is right. As long as we're going 'that sucks' and not doing anything, why wouldn't the companies keep rolling over?

    But it was Cadbury that struck me as the obvious target - I guess because they're the only company mentioned that we actually buy anything from. And the idea of boycotting them didn't alarm me until I remembered they're Cadbury-Schweppes-Hudson and they make my tonic water... But I'd admit I got as far as their horrible website and realised just what a PITA it was going to be to send them a snitty email, and how I'd be on their spamming list forever if I did.

    I am pretty appalled that it seems noone in the media picked up on the hypocrisy of the Burger King thing, because it seems pretty bloody obvious, and I'd love to hear them try to justify it.

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 4651 posts Report Reply

  • Heather Gaye,

    Ah, but Family First doesn't have the numbers: it's Bob McCroskie and a mailing list.

    (shrug) Family First Wages Onslaught Against Free Speech = a couple of companies get a bunch of ranty letters from a vocal minority, and...what? Bully-boy tactics? Family first aren't the consummate evil, just the advertisers are being weiners.

    ...and I LOVE Hustle right now, just as much as before. It's nice to have a slightly new angle; the old seasons were coming to the point where I was just sitting around waiting for the plan b to be revealed, zero suspense.

    Morningside • Since Nov 2006 • 533 posts Report Reply

  • linger,

    Stuck over here as I am, I have yet to see one of the Burger King ads that everyone keeps referencing. Are there any on YouTube? (I couldn't immediately locate anything specifically from NZ, though several US TV segments, presumably for different campaigns, came up)

    Tokyo • Since Apr 2007 • 1943 posts Report Reply

  • Robyn Gallagher,

    I have yet to see one of the Burger King ads that everyone keeps referencing.

    Run-of-the-mill "hot" girls in bikinis.

    Burger King either appear to have realised that the only people who eat there are 15-year-old boys, or they want to reduce their customer base to that demographic.

    Raglan • Since Nov 2006 • 1946 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.