I know that I can sometimes be "over-sensitive" when it comes to certain things, especially when they're just "a bit of fun" that nobody else is particularly all that fussed about, but I am struggling with the content of this particular ad campaign and I have been for quite some time now whenever it pops up between the programmes...
Set in revolutionary France, a beautifully photographed baying mob of peasants burst into a Chocolatiers shop where, under the floorboards, two aristocrats are hiding and eating bowls of breakfast cereal. Sadly, one of them cannot resist the chocolatey goodness of the cereal and the crunch of his biting into this delightful foodstuff betrays them and they are discovered.
So far, so "amusing"...
However, as we cut back to the pack shot, and the jolly voiceover, we see the shadow as the blade of a guillotine sweeps down and, presumably, deals swift revolutionary "justice" to the unfortunate aristos, which is, unfortunately, where this particular campaign rather loses me.
I'm sure that it's no more distasteful than any other ad campaign that you might care to think of and it does not, at least, involve anybody who appears to be terminally vacuous creating obviously made-up words for yoghurt as they smugly recline in a ballgown, or the strangely pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo of anti-ageing creams, or indeed the frankly bonkers notions behind the advertising of what is, essentially, a chemical smell, in all of those perfume and after shave advertisements.
Neither indeed does it make any bizarre claims about what your hair looking a certain way can do for your life and how portentously people seem to find ways to talk about its importance to their daily lives. Nor does it try to portray what obviously not-real "women" talk about whenever two or three of them are gathered together, or give hopelessly impossible aspirations about life or body image to the emotionally vulnerable like a lot of advertising appears to do.
What it does do, however, and for "comedy effect" is have the poor unfortunates who are enjoying the product in question taken off and executed at the end of this tiny little movie, because, despite the genuine horrors of that particularly bloody Revolution (and let's be honest here, aren't they all...?), you can clearly see the guillotine blade sweep down at the end of the advertisement during what used to be called the "pack shot"...
Not, I'd have thought, the most affirming endorsement for the product I'd have thought...
Then there's the slightly distasteful sensation of using public execution for its comedy value which, I know, I know, I ought not to be taking quite so seriously, even though I do sometimes think that the eager and ambitious young things who work in advertising really ought to get some sensitivity training and perhaps take lessons in restraint and about what is an acceptable thing about which to make fun of...
But then...
Perhaps it is just me that worries about such things...
After all, the mighty social powerhouse that is known around these parts as Fizzbok have now decided that it's "okay" for people to be able to view genuine footage of actual decapitations, having once quite rightly decided that this was something utterly deplorable and ought to be condemned outright.
Their argument appears to be based upon the principle that "people" ought to be able to express their disgust by having a good old gawp at the footage and then, like fascinated rubberneckers at the scene of an horrific car crash, then tell everyone how "appalled" they are, presumably by leaving a tasteless comment or choosing not to hit the "like" button...
But then... You know what teenagers are like... so such things are more than likely to have been "trending" once that became a news story and, not for the first time today, perhaps I've found another load of candidates for sensitivity training courses...
And then there's the other slightly worrying possible outcome of this ridiculous policy rethink, because nobody ever, ever tried to do something after seeing it on a screen did they...? All of those campaigns against violence on television were fundamentally flawed because no child ever thumped another after watching a superhero punch someone in a film did they...?
Sadly, unfortunately, they did... Just as they've tried to "fly" off garage roofs, so I now expect thousands of YouTube videos of the executions of hamsters and budgies and mice to start appearing, and, on top of all that wretched animal suffering, which is bad enough in itself, as well as the indignity and suffering of the victims being shown in those original videos, they'll also no doubt be yet another campaign of "moral outrage" from our "much-loved" guardians in both the press and parliament, all of which could be avoided if someone at FizzBok went for some much-needed sensitivity training...
But then...
Perhaps it is just me that worries about such things...
After all, the mighty social powerhouse that is known around these parts as Fizzbok have now decided that it's "okay" for people to be able to view genuine footage of actual decapitations, having once quite rightly decided that this was something utterly deplorable and ought to be condemned outright.
Their argument appears to be based upon the principle that "people" ought to be able to express their disgust by having a good old gawp at the footage and then, like fascinated rubberneckers at the scene of an horrific car crash, then tell everyone how "appalled" they are, presumably by leaving a tasteless comment or choosing not to hit the "like" button...
But then... You know what teenagers are like... so such things are more than likely to have been "trending" once that became a news story and, not for the first time today, perhaps I've found another load of candidates for sensitivity training courses...
And then there's the other slightly worrying possible outcome of this ridiculous policy rethink, because nobody ever, ever tried to do something after seeing it on a screen did they...? All of those campaigns against violence on television were fundamentally flawed because no child ever thumped another after watching a superhero punch someone in a film did they...?
Sadly, unfortunately, they did... Just as they've tried to "fly" off garage roofs, so I now expect thousands of YouTube videos of the executions of hamsters and budgies and mice to start appearing, and, on top of all that wretched animal suffering, which is bad enough in itself, as well as the indignity and suffering of the victims being shown in those original videos, they'll also no doubt be yet another campaign of "moral outrage" from our "much-loved" guardians in both the press and parliament, all of which could be avoided if someone at FizzBok went for some much-needed sensitivity training...
Mark my words: The world truly is going to hell in a tumbril...
FACEBOOK MAKES U-TURN OVER DECAPITATION VIDEO CLIP
"First, when we review content that is reported to us, we will take a more holistic look at the context surrounding a violent image or video, and will remove content that celebrates violence," it said.
"Second, we will consider whether the person posting the content is sharing it responsibly, such as accompanying the video or image with a warning and sharing it with an age-appropriate audience.
"Based on these enhanced standards, we have re-examined recent reports of graphic content and have concluded that this content improperly and irresponsibly glorifies violence. For this reason, we have removed it."The announcement follows a series of flip-flops by the company.On May 1, when questioned about death clips being shared on the site, the firm told the BBC that its users had the right to depict the "world in which we live"."We will remove instances of these videos that are reported to us while we evaluate our policy and approach to this type of content," it declared.However, less than two hours after the BBC published an interview with one of the firm's safety advisers - who raised concerns about the harm this could cause teenagers - it announced a change of tack.The company promised at the time to announce its decision when the review was completed.But at the start of this week the BBC was contacted by one of the social network's members who had complained about a clip uploaded on 16 October, which the company was refusing to take down."The video shows a woman having her head cut off by a man in a mask," the user wrote."She is alive when this happens. Looking at the comments a load of people have reported this to Facebook and had the same reply."An Australian police force was among those who had complained. It said it had been told by Facebook's moderators that the video "did not violate our community standard on graphic violence".When questioned, a spokeswoman for Facebook confirmed that the ban had indeed been dropped and that the company had introduced a new rule: such material could be posted and shared on the site so long as the original post did not celebrate or encourage the actions depicted.
Full article here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24635498
As the Queen of Hearts would say...
ReplyDelete