Forbidden Donut

lol?

I don't understand your argument at all. Frankly, I think you're being irrational.

They're just trying to find ways to actually draw attention to the facts they publicize; it's not their fault that Americans (although to be fair, I'll say people in general) require gimics or 'publicity stunts' to actually pay attention to anything serious. What more 'civilized' approach would you suggest -- not doing anything at all?

If you don't like what they do, ignore them. They're not banging on your door in the night or protesting on your property. If they bother you enough, do exactly what you threatened and hope to start an anti-movement. However, if you choose to do the latter, I truly hope you think about more legitimate (or perhaps better expressed) reasons for not liking them because at the moment you just seem a bit silly.

They rely on scare tactics to inform people. It's no different than the same tactics used to criminalize marijuana and other drugs back in the day (excluding racism, which was the underlying reason to ban these substances).


And if you haven't noticed, I'm an irrational person. That's like calling me a pothead.

QFT

I'll admit that I haven't seen much of their stuff recently, but when I used to see their stuff frequently on TV it never seemed like they were manipulating or trying to trick anyone into believing anything. If drawing attention to facts as a means to prove a point is a problem, how on earth are we suppose to discuss anything important? We might as well get mad at people drawing attention to the fight against breast cancer because their pink ribbons are too bright.

As you called them, 'scare tactics' are completely reasonable forms of protest when your cause is good and you have the facts to back your tactics up. The fights against drugs and alcohol in the past (and today) lacked the latter and relied entirely on subjective banter, and they also to some extent lacked the former. In what way, in either regard, has the Truth movement abused the use of these tactics?

I have every right to my own opinion. I believe in fighting good causes and the tobacco industry is worth fighting against, but I never thought of complaining until recently about their methods, because it has become more and more underhanded. Let me see if they post their commercials on the web so I can share what I think isn't cool to do, which is my point.

This thread's just a big joke, right?



I suppose you should write letters to Mr. Moore and the creators of "Super Size Me." Mr. Moore is practically the king of propaganda and has much more publicity than Truth really has. I know handfuls of people who actually don't eat McDonalds because that moron who ate McDonalds, and nothing else, for a month straight actually got fat. Truth propaganda is discrete and subtle compared to the two aforementioned.



I feel like I'm going to have a hard time finding where Truth claims their commercials are witty; even though some of them have been, I don't feel that is their intent for them all. They do possess wisdom; God forbid they share it. And if Truth commercials are "forceful" then so is virtually any commercial that does something to draw your attention to it instead of just saying "Buy a Honda." in black text on a white background. I feel a better word for their commercials would be "dramatic," certainly not over-dramatic - but dramatic. And if you find anything dramatic too forceful for your sensitive tastes then I don't know how you could even see these commercials since you're certainly not watching any television shows.



I feel the maturity and sensibility just oozing out of this sentence.



Quite ironic to say that. They're providing the other half of the story that tobacco companies certainly aren't providing. I would rather decide for myself as well; I would just prefer to have both sides of the story rather than just one. But of course, ignorance is bliss.



I'm having a problem thinking of a Truth commercial that I've seen that wasn't meaningful or civilized. But I suppose, as evident by this letter you sent them, that you're a profession on being meaningful and civilized, so maybe you could point out some examples for me.

I have to say I'm completely opposed to you on this Jason, firstly because the people at truth.com are the first people I've seen make such an impact on the public. Because they're using their 'publicity stunts' as you call them. People are ignorant, and won't listen to what they don't want to hear unless you smack them in the face with it. Shock tactics are the only thing that register with people these days. Another group of protesters is all fine and dandy, but I guarantee you they don't have the same effect as this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRHvZazd4IM

or this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4xmFcrJexk

I'm sorry that you feel what they're doing is wrong, or propaganda, But I believe it's the only way to get people the listen to what they need to hear.

They're not telling people to stop smoking, all they're doing is giving people what they need to have, which is information.

It could be that I'm a chain smoker with little respect for my own health, but I find the adds to be annoying. Stop telling me what I already know. We know smoking kills, it's on the fucking box when you buy cigarettes. If it's too hard for you to read the box, and realize that they're going to kill you, you probably either deserve to die, or don't give a shit. All things said and done, while I don't necessarily find your reasoning to be air tight, I agree with you in a number of ways. The information is already there, if you need a bunch of self righteous little twats to spell it out for you, then to be honest, fucking kill yourself.

Edit: Also of note, it's not even like it's some crazy well funded peoples movement. They can say what they say because of legislation forcing the tobacco companies to fund them. Hell, all it really does is give the tobacco companies a caveat when people complain that they're literally killing people with a highly addictive product. "Hey, we're doing all we can, we're funding adds that tell you we're killing you."

A bunch of fucking horseshit.

You might understand how dangerous cigarettes can be, Bill, but others may not. All they do is find ways to portray what some people would call meaningless facts in such a way that they carry more meaning. They annoy you, and that is all well and good, but I'm sure a million commercials annoy you. They're interrupting your shit and for the most part giving you information you don't care about or already know. That's the drawback to mass advertising, not Truth commercials in particular.

Jason, you do have a right to your opinion -- this being America and all. But that doesn't mean your particular opinion on this matter is a good one, and it doesn't mean you won't receive flak for it.

i agree with the gay canadian.

I think I understand what gmnotutoo is getting at... Im sure he feels much more strongly about "above the influence" than "truth" campaign. "above the influence" is extremely abrasive propaganda with zero scientific research to back its claims. Every time I see that not only do I feel insulted but i cringe thinking about the poor naive minds being lead around on a rope by that bullshit.

"OH MY GOD LOOK AT THE CAMPAIGN SYMBOL ITS LIKE COUNTER CULTURE ART I TOTALLY RELATE TO THAT!! ITS SO FUCKING COOL, IT ALMOST LOOKS LIKE MIAMI INK ART SO REBELLIOUS. LETS SKATEBOARD, POT IS BAD!
no. sorry, thats not what I'm thinking, you



FAILED

if you want truth, seek it on your own through experience with logic and intuition guiding your way. You were given/developed these abilities for a reason. Thats whats so sad, is things sell because of how much flash and dazzle is behind them and not because of the functionality or rational behind it. Its a society of mindlessness and dependence, its apparent even in the sense of humor they use in shows these days. Look at an episode of House during season one and then watch in season 4 as the sense of humor progresses from unique to completely overkill, overbearing pretentious shit that they pile on because of "viewer response".
OH MY GOD GUYS THEY THOUGHT IT WAS FUNNY THEY LIKED IT SO INCREASE THE AMOUNT x8 AND MAKE IT 8X BETTER LOL!!.
no. it doesnt work that way, shut the fuck up. GOD. What this is saying if you havnt caught on yet is, these targeting agencies that advise corporations in the retail and entertainment industry are actually 8 steps behind the frontier in both markets. What they shove down your throat with a steel rod during the commercial break was actually "COOL" half a year ago, and just pisses people of now. Likewise it stopped being cool after being used 12 times already.
-opera blasts in movie previews
-the gravelly announcer voice thats atleast twice as deep as 19/20 males lol..WOW
-the advertisements- in the commercial two people are conversing "you mean if I switch my insurance to"...".. I get "....", "REALLY??!!!" "WOWWWWWWW". OH MY GOD I CAN TOTALLY RELATE TO THAT THEY ARE HAVING A CASUAL CONVERSATION AND INCONSPICUOUSLY ADVERTISING TO ME!! INGENIOUS! IM BUYING THIS. TOTALLY SLIPPED PASSED ME

incase you havent noticed by this point there is no real structure to all this ranting... just a central message that the average consumer is targeted using absolute retardation..and the troubling part is its effective. That really discourages me from participating in society.

and i have to throw this in, as its loosely related.
attention movie makers. Just because the matrix utilized bullet time doesnt mean 800 other movies had to follow suite. Reeves dodges bullets in the movie because of his existence in the matrix. Thats the premise of the movie, the bullet dodging is a reality per the story line. Yet we have movies produced 10 years later, whose entire premise is built on reality, and theres a cop dodging bullets in slow motion. That doesn't stop them though, IT JUST LOOKS COOL, ITS CHEEZE WITH A Z OUT OF THE COMPRESSED CAN MAN, PILE IT ON ITS SO EFFING GOOD, PAY $12 TO SEE EVERY MOVIE WITH EXTREMEME BOOBS GLISTENING WITH SWEAT BOUNCING IN SLOW MO THROUGH THE AIR WITH BULLETS WHIZZING BY

i like monk a lot

No, it is not a joke Erling, but thank you for whatever you said. I wouldn't make a thread like this in any humorous way at all.

I didn't post this thinking everyone would agree, I expect flak and debate, which is good for learning and sharing idea's. I thought it was neat that they'd take the time to respond so I shared it with to get opinions and that is all. I didn't have to make a thread, but I wanted to see how many other people thought similarly to me. Just having Bill and Monk agree with me in theory on their methods shows me that they might not be expressing their message in the best way that they can.

I do believe I know how to handle this...

Ironically Truth is sponsored by the Phillip-Morris tobacco company.

god dang, tried to add a video but it doesnt work.=/, well here it is

funny truth commerical
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvCH6lzjmgQ

and another

http://youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0

what pisses me off most is the kids in the commercials who "tell" the truth. everybody already knows smoking is bad, so what the hell are you going to accomplish by crusading against it? find a more worthwhile crusade for goodness sakes!

and monk, there is nothing wrong with those above the influence ads. if you think kids are naive for following them, then i assume they are not naive if they smoke pot. thats a load of bs if thats what you mean.

My problem is not with the kids personal choice of whether they do or do not smoke pot. My problem is certain interest groups trying so aggressively to instill a particular on belief on already naive minds. Again I say naive regardless of whether they have or haven't smoked pot. I have problems with organizations exploiting this naivety. Obviously all the medical research has verified that its in the kids best interest. Not?

Nothing wrong with the above the influence ads??? are you serious?

i just watched seven of them on the above the influence web site and almost every single one kept harping on the same bullshit propaganda that has always been in anti drug education. there were no facts stated at all in any of them. the ads could have been talking about ANY bad habit, chemical or not, illegal or not.

including alcohol. In fact, lets include writing speeding tickets for insecure officer picked on as a child, soap operas for the emotionally wrecked to cry their hearts out to, roller coasters and fighter jets for the adrenaline junkies.. or you could say naturally occurring chemicals in the body..or the countless natural herbs abundantly growing in the wild for the adventurous. LIVE ABOVE THE INFLUENCE, avoid all that so you can look cool and casual like the 3 hour makeup artist prepped kid on the screen..

The world has too many people in it.

I'm a little confused what you are trying to state there. Can you please try to explain it a little further?

For all the people that know how terrible this product is WHY in gods name do you smoke them?

You know how terrible it is and yet you proceed to smoke them rather than take methods to quit?
Maybe whne you loose a lung or a close friend/family member you'll realize...

But these commercials are for the semi-intelligent people, the ones that haven't started yet, the ones that do need to know the information even with a little "gimic" tactic or two.

I still don't understand how the older generation doesn't try to quit if you see how terrible it is, maybe if you were younger and you saw the commercials, the truth commercials you'd have realized the severity of your actions?

Going back to what Bill said, I believe MOST long term smokers know cigarettes will cause them harm. So many young kids though really have no idea what damage can be done by smoking. Thats who these ads are really targeting... kids

Which is the best people to target, since that is the same people the tobacco industry is targeting.

I'm stating all the ways different individuals get their fix legal or not, adding on to what CJ said regarding weed


regarding the above the influence campaign*

For logical business reasons, yeah.

I do not personally endorse tobacco, but I do like to point out to people that it did help finance this country upon its inception. A curious consortium, yes?

So was slavery; so I suppose if there was a commercial against slavery you wouldn't like it.

Most long term smokers use smoking to destress. Usually they've tried all other types of methods and seems that the only way they can cope with it is by smoking. By the time they want to quit, it's a lot harder for them to because of the fact that now their body is used to having nicotine and undergoes withdrawal when the body obtains deficient amounts of the chemical.

You try being addicted to something, something that you like and that helps you destresses you and stop all of a sudden just quit. It's hard for many people.

I'm morally against both; duly noted by the phrase that stated I do not endorse smoking. But I tolerate them.

The difference between slavery and smoking is one involves a choice, the other doesn't. That being said, the truth adds are for the most part BS. Pretty much everyone understands that smoking is bad for you. They teach that in school, its on the box, it most certainly isn't a secret. I would argue that virtually any type of ad for anti-smoking is ineffective. The only thing that gets people's attention and is actually informative are more interactive and demonstrative explanations, such as Bill Nye. And they way that they show you just how bad smoking is for you in schools. Those are information based, where as a 30 second TV ad or billboard ad has more of a nagging effect.

In any God damn case: Why does it matter? I hate 75% of the commercials I see and ones along the lines of Truth and Above the Influence are, by far, the ones that bother me the least. They're for a good cause, many times they're amusing (the only saving grace of the other 25% of commercials) and oh my freakin' word - You really don't have to watch them.

This whole ridiculous thread is like me watching Super Size Me then writing a letter to whoever made it complaining about how it's obnoxious; in your face, uncivilized, not funny and a damn waste of my time. To which I would hope they would reply "Don't fucking watch our shit then."

And if your only issue is that it's a commercial and thus somehow you can't possibly tear yourself away from your screen for 15 seconds to not watch this monstrous propaganda machine trying to get you to stop smoking yourself into a stupor every day then maybe you should just kill yourself so someone less imbecilic can smoke your precious weed and/or tobacco.

P.S. - Is anyone else having an issue with Firefox's spell check? I mistyped tobacco as 'tabacoo' (Don't laugh, I'm exhausted) and 'bacon' is the first word it thinks I meant to type. I even opened up word just to make sure it could figure it out and it could. I've been seeing this issue with the spell check lots of times recently, just wondering if anyone else is.

So because your example using slavery was at best a stretch, and at worse flat out retarded, you've decided that the best way to express your point is to start insulting everyone who does smoke, whether it be weed or cannabis? I'm not quite sure I understand your logic. Am I imbecilic for smoking?

I've stated my points, rather well, in a post earlier in the thread. I know smoking is bad for me. Everyone knows smoking is bad for them. Everyone knows weed effects you like any other narcotic does. The issue isn't that it effects you, it's that the above the influence adds suggest that it effects everyone in a way that makes them run over kids with a car, or stop being interesting, etc. Do I smoke pot? No, not usually, for various reasons, however, what's wrong with someone getting high and sitting around and talking to their friends? Or listening to music, or playing video games, etc? They're not running over kids, and they have friends so apparently someone likes their company.

I think more than anything I don't understand why the opinion that all of these adds are a bunch of bullshit sends you into fury so easily. We don't agree with you. Why is this such a big deal? After your last post, which contained some veiled personal attacks, and you saying if you don't like it don't watch it, why read our posts about it?

You could just as easily turn away from your screen for an extra 15 seconds every day and easily avoid this post.

"And if your only issue is that it's a" -post- " and thus somehow you can't possibly tear yourself away from your screen for 15 seconds to not watch this monstrous" -anti- " propaganda machine trying to get you to stop " -working yourself into a twaty self righteous fury- " every day then maybe you should just kill yourself so someone less imbecilic can " -actually enter into a discussion without helping it degenerate into a bunch of useless bullshit as opposed to what could at times be, a decent conversation.

Do I think the way weed worded his first post, and his discourse with truth, was a little immature at times? Yeah, I do. However, his point is valid.

I didn't feel like running down a long side-discussion on my analogy of slavery - just as I rarely desire to explain points I make when people don't get them the first time. But hell, Bill, just for you. The analogy wasn't perfect, sure I'll agree. His retort was that slavery isn't a choice, which clearly demonstrates he either doesn't understand slavery or thought I meant one thing and didn't spend the extra microsecond to realize I meant the other. Being a slave surely isn't normally a choice but by golly committing slavery sure is! He said that tobacco helped financially start this country, no idea what his point was but I figured it had something to do with the current discussion so I followed it up. He didn't understand and since it really wasn't on topic I dropped it.

Read the third section run on sentence for clarification as to who I was volleying personal attacks at; obviously not you - the person who smokes and knows it's bad for you so you can just ignore the infomercials as they don't really apply to you.

In all honesty - I barely skimmed your post earlier; I know you smoke, I know you know it's bad for you and I know that you really don't give a shit about it; so I read on. Sadly while we, at our collective age would hope that everyone knows that smoking is bad for them they don't. It's like me watching an infomercial on how to do multiplication and then bitching because it wasn't creative, witty or informative - for me. Truth infomercials aren't directed at smokers who know smoking's bad for them, it's really not directed at smokers at all probably.

Touche for tacking that ever cliche retort on the end of your post with a bit of original flair but it's sadly just as impotent as the other 100 million times people have used it. Do you want me to go in depth for this one too?

Last, you say his point is valid. Here are his points;



Truth commercials are not witty: No point at all, Truth commercials never claimed to be witty as far as I know.
They do not possess a shred of wisdom: Maybe weed should look up the word wisdom but in fact the commercials do.
They are forceful in nature: It's a commercial, you don't have to watch it unless you're interested in the information it's putting forth. I hardly find that forceful.
They apparently do not let people decide for themselves: As I said in an earlier post I find this highly ironic. He's trying to tell them not to tell the other side of the story, yet then says that he wants people to decide for themselves. They are letting people decide for themselves.

In his second message he, of course, completely contradicts himself with;

This is then followed by;

Which is fantastic as he doesn't have to watch the commercials and since he clearly doesn't care what the message is they're saying then he's not watching for any informative reason.

Maybe a dictionary would help here again but the Truth commercials are extremely meaningful and civilized, even when they're blaring through a horn to tobacco companies they're polite.

The fact that he calls their commercials publicity stuns just ices the cake. A commercial by definition is a publicity stunt.

Maybe I'm being one-sided with it all and I can't see past his glaring attempts at using fancy words to try and sound smart (Incoming grammar corrections for my entire post) but none of his so called points were valid.

In any case, yeah of course I threw a personal attack in there. I'm a bigger asshole than you are believe it or not; I just rarely have a reason!

P.S. - I smoke cigars, have smoked weed many of times and I don't smoke cigarettes because they smell horrid.

think about those ads on the simplest fucking level.



seriously, this isn't psychology, stop analyzing the shit out of things. it will only bring you a headache.


the ads are guerilla advertising tactics used to convey a message and bring "a false sense of balance" in the cigarette community. phillip morris is doing everything possible to set a "level" playing field in order to regain profit.


advertising is just that. it's there to persuade you to do/buy something. it fucking works. they have test runs, samples, surveys, the whole works....to make sure that the minute you see it on television either you remember it, or tell someone else about it. ad agencies are doing their job to get this point across.


if you're getting information from a television and taking it to heart without putting any thought into it, you're stupid.


plain and simple.


stop watching television. it's a source of entertainment. i don't care if you smoke weed, but leave me alone about it. and furthermore, i want phillip morris to sell cigarettes to children. it's the easiest way for them to make money.

if your child is stupid enough to want to smoke cigarettes, they deserve to die.

I don't think you understand the ramifications of that statement.

/applause

the gov't of canada has the right idea by taxing the shit out of cigarettes. Packs of smokes here cost in the $7.00-$12.00 range.

it made me pretty much drop the habit cold turkey. definitely more effective than warning ads since having enough to pay rent affects you now unlike (possible) health issues many years down the road

Some people here are attacking the hell out of this posts validity, despite the rational and well thought out opinions. If thats your viewpoint why don't you go ahead and talk about how useless these forums are. They are here to encourage these very threads after all, discussion that binds the community together.

I get that you are an asshole and I understand you don't like my views. Whose the more immature though; the person who complains to the company with reason or the person who personally attacks people for their opinions over the internet? I didn't do anything specifically to you, so chill out.

The core of arguments are opinions, and facts take a supporting role when they can be "discredited" by the wave of a hand. I think this thread should be locked for the sake of preserving the peace. There are many good points here; and there are enough of them for all involved to make their own informed decisions at this point without having to berate one another.

GG Ignoring my whole post that had something to do with your so-called points. Or did you have no rebuttal?

No, this is the first time I've actually read your entire post since the first sentence when you called my opinions a joke.

lol, think thats a little excessive at this point?

But my first sentence isn't even on subject...?

I read Bills post and he quoted that line so I copied it. If you are talking about something else then I have no idea what you are trying to say.

That was like 1/100th my post and was directed at Bill not even you.

Back on subject, I hope that the current graduates entering the marketing can be a little less obtrusive in their methods. A little more honesty would be nice also, letting the product or idea sell itself with functionality or rationality instead of the trickery