Hard News: It's not OK to just make stuff up
430 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 8 9 10 11 12 … 18 Newer→ Last
-
My mother called me a slut one time. I was horrified until I realised that she meant I really really needed to tidy my room.
-
Y'know, Capital coast health presently has just one clinical psychologist available to out patients, for the entire city of Porirua. That means only twenty people receive cognitive behavioral therapy, without needing to come up with around $120.00 minimum per session to go private, or meet the criteria for ACC assistance.
Mental health services in NZ are pretty poor.
the only ads concerned with drinking were either violent, deeply emotional scarring illustratons of worst case scenarios, or liquor ads featuring buff larrikans or rugged hard men with not a chick in sight. Is it still all scare tactics? or have they subsequently offered some positive scenarios as guides?
I remember a 90s ad that had people giving lines; "I don't because I'm pregnant", "I don't because I'm training", "I don't because I don't want to", etc. And at the end Temuera Morrison came on and said "when someone says they don't want to drink, they have their reasons. Respect that, that's what a friend would do."
It seemed like a good ad. But their current focus is on binge drinkers, and that's a fair call, from where they stand (minimising alcohol related harm).
-
My mother called me a slut one time. I was horrified until I realised that she meant I really really needed to tidy my room.
I thought a computer game was calling me a slut once, until I realized it was Swedish for "Game Over".
-
Yeah I recall that now you mention it George, but it's still kind of reflecting negative stereotypes back on the masses. This binary implication that you either do or you don't, similar to the line taken with smoking whereby 'smoking kills', as opposed to the more accurate 'too much smoking kills', (I'm quite comfortable on three a day)
I just never remember any ad, providing the blueprint for the ultimate night of drinking, where having too much isn't an issue. A couple more Fußball tables around he place, wouldn't go amiss either.
-
very clockwork orange
-
..interesting use of 'respect' there George....mana et al
-
I visited Copenhagen last year (or was it the year before) and was most disturbed to see the legend "Slut Spurt" emblazoned across shop fronts, in the Red Light District (where my hotel was, near the railway station) and the regular shopping districts.
The dilemna of the possibly over sexed Danes was solved when I realised it seemed to mean something like "Sale"
-
3410,
The Herald's John Drinnan weighs in on the debate (scroll down to the "Hustle for Russell" subheading):
I'm with Ralston on those social engineering ads. I know the messages are valid - but the Nanny State connections are so pervasive...
-
I believe....
I have seen a photo...
The demonising of men....
Very few men.....
most men.....
some women think..... .
I cannot be bother looking up a source.....
If men and women were treated equally before the law....
Most lefties are not prepared to debate an issue
Chuck, for someone who claims to want a robust debate, you rely awfully heavily on speculation, hearsay, rumour and isolated cases, at the expense of an analysis of inconvenient things such as, y'know, facts..
and as for this particular dogwhistle...
The demonising of men....
When there is pararity of men and women in boardrooms, parliament, and pay, when women can stand up and do a job without being called a bitch or a lesbian, when women can work in offices without being subjected to, and having to tolerate, crude and heavy-handed flirtation verging on harrasment, then and only then will I start taking any notice of any whining limpdick who uses this phrase or varients thereof. Until then, I think the echochamber of kiwiblog is probably the best place for you.
-
And Max (whoever you are) if I want to post stuff on Kiwiblog then I will do it myself - kindly stop feeding what I post here to our rude and rather dim troll.
Apologies Sacha if I have broken some unwritten blog etiquette and/or annoyed you.
I was genuinely interested in his response. Explanation of why...I was annoyed earlier in the post when David 'Thoughtspur' had commented a few times with his assertions against what Russell and others had written here. He commented then never came back to reply to other commenters challenges and questions.
Then along came Chuck and it seemed to be going the same way. The positive side of 'goading' him to come back and answer peoples questions about what he/she had posted was that Chuck had to properly (as far as it goes) explain his/her position and source. This led the way for the excellent rebuttal from 81st Column. When the conversation is one sided (as it largely was until this) it is harder for someone like me to process the ideas put forward. -
The not OK campaign that says it is never okay to hit a woman clearly implies it is sometimes okay for a woman to hit a man.
... ! ? !
I cannot be bother looking up a source of which they are many as it would be out of date, done overseas or not peer reviewed or some such nonsense.
Yeah, expecting the a study to be relevant and peer reviewed, these are the silly standards of the left. tsk tsk.
(Btw, nice summary of Chuck's idiocy, Rich.)
-
The dilemna of the possibly over sexed Danes was solved when I realised it seemed to mean something like "Sale"
Heh, classic. I still do mental double takes when Germans talk about their famous philosopher Kant, which sounds exactly like.....
-
The Herald's John Drinnan weighs in on the debate (scroll down to the "Hustle for Russell" subheading):
"I'm with Ralston on those social engineering ads. I know the messages are valid - but the Nanny State connections are so pervasive..."
To be fair to Drinnan, his point ends up being more aimed at all the so called "social engineering" type ads in general, and he has a point:
I know the messages are valid - but the Nanny State connections are so pervasive: Driving Is In His Blood, The Grim Reaper intersections, the slob who throws his kid around the room, the female at after-work drinks being sexually accosted.
We are warned not to fry up after a night on the booze. All failings that are not a problem for the vast majority of viewers and could be mentioned once in a while.
But viewers are whacked with them every night. Ad campaigns keep a lot of advertising people in jobs and bolster television revenue. But sometimes they make free-to-air TV impossible to watch.
I don't agree with Ralston's or Chuck's criticisms of the Not Okay ads specifically, but I agree with some of what Drinnan's said above. The plethora of public service ads may dilute the effect of the more worthwhile ones (like the Not Okay ads).
-
3410,
Didn't say I disagree with Drinnan; just drawing attention. :)
-
The plethora of public service ads may dilute the effect of the more worthwhile ones
I want to find out the person who came up with the ACC ones, and with the person who thought it was okay to show them so early in the day. They're terrifying and stupid. Do you know anybody who is now more cautious in the shower? But I'd have less of a problem with all of them if they came with a little viewer's warning. There is no earthly reason why my children should be exposed to them.
And okay, I have a little problem with the road safety ads too. Why is A Clockwork Orange R18 whereas the kind of stuff that they force Alex to watch in A Clockword Orange ('for the good of society) isn't? But the social engineering label is just lazy. All ads are a form of social engineering, for heaven's sake. That we should use some of that time to promote useful messages doesn't seem such a bad idea.
-
And you succeeded admirably.
-
oops, last post aimed at 3410.
-
But the social engineering label is just lazy. All ads are a form of social engineering, for heaven's sake. That we should use some of that time to promote useful messages doesn't seem such a bad idea.
Absolutely agree. It grates about as much as "PC gone mad!"
-
Out of interest, Do ALAC make many ads illustrating the positives of drinking or are they all mainly just demonising?
Yeah, they did a bunch featuring guys being the designated driver (the one with the drunk guy sitting in the back of the car making beeping noises as they back out of the driveway cracks me up), taking taxis, giving the guy in the bathtub a pillow, all that stuff. The 'you're a bloody legend' ones. The other 'it's not okay' ads also feature guys talking about doing the right thing, working to control their own violence, or intervening when their mates got out of hand. I have enormous respect for the sheer guts that must have taken for those men.
And oddly, when walking home from the pool yesterday I was passed by a bus with an AIDS campaign on the side. It featured a middle-aged woman and a slogan something like 'look beyond the stereotype'. Just sayin'.
-
I still do mental double takes when Germans talk about their famous philosopher Kant, which sounds exactly like
When I was first asked (by a francophone German) "Do you like crêpes?" my first response was wondering why anyone would like crap.
All ads are a form of social engineering, for heaven's sake.
What kind of communist are you? Social engineering belongs in the hands of private enterprise! If people don't want to be beaten by their domestic partners, let them pay for their own television advertisements.
-
Don't worry, I'm sure the new Government will get on with some anti-social engineering soon enough.
-
I've noticed public radio mentioning studies warning of the ill-heath effects of television on children.
Really? When did these pop up? At best, it should be phrased as 'the alleged ill effects..' (I do know a thing or two about the research literature, and the weaknesses of US-sourced 'effects' research)
I think John Drinnan would serve his argument better if he hadn't invoked the tired old cliche of 'the Nanny State'. So, with the change of government we no longer will have state intervention in social issues. Perhaps have instead a 'Ninny State'?
-
Social engineering belongs in the hands of private enterprise!
Great line - I expect to see it on a tee shirt sometime. I'd say there will still be intervention in social issues - but framed as you'd expect along National/Act lines in terms of law and order, personal responsibility, productivity and suchlike.
I'm most interested to see over the next few years how the Maori party's positions relate to and influence that.
-
When I was first asked (by a francophone German) "Do you like crêpes?" my first response was wondering why anyone would like crap.
German's shocking for that. My father-in-law asked me after a pretty bad trip to his house "How was your fart?", to which I answered "Suss, very suss" (Fahrt in German means journey, and Suss (with umlauts) means sweet). About 2 hours later, his son mentioned about something bad being very 'Suss', and he inquired what that meant. Then the penny dropped and he was laughing about it for the rest of the day. I even got to taste some of his especially nasty Schnapps for that. "Is it suss" he asked. It was, without doubt, or umlauts.
-
3410,
And you succeeded admirably.
As did you.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.