Re: [Global] Trains in TV ads

["Dave Proctor" <daproc@spambait.ozemail.com.au>]

"Brown Family" <pcc@ocean.com.au> wrote in message
391d3370.1945081@news.ocean.com.au">news:391d3370.1945081@news.ocean.com.au...
> On Fri, 12 May 2000 04:58:55 GMT, "Dave Proctor"
> <daproc@spambait.ozemail.com.au> wrote:
>
> >I am in favour of messages being blunt and "in your face" if that is what
it
> >will take to save lives. The grim reaper campaign was a good example of
> >this.
> >
> Then a large display showing an add for a lady who is "busting to meet
> you" near the school where your kids attend, wouldn't offend?

Of course it would - how is that saving lives (which is the qualification I
put in my post).

> Maybe
> not. Then how about the add of a girl's bum with an upright middle
> finger next to it that was displayed when the French resumed their
> nuclear testing in the Pacific?

Again, where is the "saving lives" component?

> Suppose that was next to your kid's
> primary school? Talk about in-your-face advertising. What about
> subtlety, does it not have it's place?

Not when messages are not getting through. If it saves lives, I say lets do
it. As I mentioned in a previos post, those who are too young to understand
it won't be offended by it. Those who are old enough to understand it
probably need to get the message anyway.
>
> >> You do realise there is a difference, don't you?
> >
> >Of course. I don't believe that the condom on the tram was senseless or
> >insensitive. It might have been tasteless and crude, but that may have
been
> >what it took to stick in peoples minds - did anyone actually bother to
ask
> >if the campaign was working before a bunch of moralistic jerks had it
taken
> >down?
> >
> If it was the only method by which we could save lives, I'd agree with
> you, but it isn't. The chances are that the people most at risk at
> more likely to drive to work and the ones more easily influenced and
> the least at risk are on their way to school by tram.

By driving, they will still see the tram (if not, they wouldn't have been in
the trams catchment anyway, so would have missed it anyway).

Dave