Stupid charity ad using 7/7 bombers in antisuicide campaign
- Thread starter Badger Kitten
- Start date
Badger Kitten
oof
kyser said:
I said
I didn't presume say it wouldn't have helped. I said there is no evidence to show that it would have made a difference. I think CALM are the presumptive ones, obliquely inferring they could.
Pic of 7/7 bomb scene .
Then ''Stop suicide'' and their number!
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
Badger Kitten said:
Both the replies to your blog were clearly a response to your blog and associated comments, which means they weren't responding to the ad, they were responding to you and your comments. Very, very different thing.
Prompted response is VERY different from unprompted.
(of prolific but disrespected posters)Badger Kitten
oof
wiskey said:except the big box at the top of your blog that says you are a 7/7 survivor.
i'm not having a go. just disagreeing
I know you are not having a go.
Plenty of people disagree with me on the blog. Another commenter has disagreed. The blog is not full of sock puppets agreeing with me, at least, not normally.
The people who have left comments and outed themselves as ex-suicidal know as much about me as most posters here, (who are happily disagreeing with me, on a thread I started on the subject so I do not see the difference) . The commenters have, interestingly, agreed with my position. I take their opinion as seriously as I take your opinion or anyone else's here. Their opinion is however interesting, because they are the target audience for this campaign and they disagree with it
Hollis
bloody furious
"And what's with the ''Last year, 4 suicidal British British men got our attention'' strapline? The bombings certainly got our attention. That seems to have been one of the bombers' political aims. But is suicide all about ''getting our attention''?
This seems to be another misreading on your part.. the point is that we're unaware of this problem, not that people committing suicide want attention.
This seems to be another misreading on your part.. the point is that we're unaware of this problem, not that people committing suicide want attention.
Badger Kitten
oof
kyser_soze said:
No it isn't - you read my opening post here, how come your response is not a prompted response? There is no difference at all.
Georgie Porgie
made the boys cry too.
.
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
Badger Kitten said:No it isn't - you read my opening post here, how come your response is not a prompted response? There is no difference at all.
BK said:
You blogged about it, they read the blog and responded to your comments about the ad - in other words they didn't see the ad in isolation, they were responding (if you've written anything similar on you blog to your first post here) to your comments on the ad - what's to say they would have even drawn out that comparison had it not been prompted?
And my replies ARE prompted response (despite largely being about the replies to your blog) about it - I'm disagreeing with you. Had I seen the ad in isolation I doubt I'd have paid any attention to it beyond 'Hmm, interesting use of a 7/7 image related to suicide, bet that'll have the 7/7 victims' groups quoting their outrage in the press'.
Having re-read your post, you clearly don't know what the difference between prompted an unprompted response is:
Unprompted response is the viewers IMMEDIATE thoughts on seeing an ad. Prompted response is ANY response that has some form of prior context. Your comments in the blog meant that those two replies weren't a direct, unprompted response to the ad, they were a response to the ad as mediated by your blog comments.
Badger Kitten
oof
kyser_soze said:
But the point I am making ( and I don't know why it isn't coming across more clearly, because I am trying and trying here) is that
ANOTHER COMMENTER HAS READ MY BLOG AND DISAGREED just like you are doing.
YET the two people who are most clearly target audience for CALM have AGREED.
So what is the difference? I am at a loss? Plenty of people here know who I am, my background, I made my position clear in my first post, they have disagreed, so has another commenter on my blog, yet the poitn is, and maybe you don't like it because it weakens your argument which is that this only is offensive to 7/7 people -
2 non 7/7 people affected by suicide - ie. the target audience for the campaign - have agreed with me..
So your point that the blog is only going to contain people prompted by what I say and agreeing with me is just wrong. Anyway, I am not here to bang on about the blog, I am here to see if anyone thinks the ad is bad for the technical, professional reasons I went into - that suicide homicide is totally different to suiicdie, and that to use murderers to target suiciders is daft, and off-message for the target audience.
The only target audience reaction I have seen so far have agreed with me, but as there are many young men on u75 who fall into the target audience, I thought I'd come over and see if it was any different.
Badger Kitten
oof
I do know what a prompted response, FFS, that is why I said '' how come your response is not a prompted response'', because it was clearly a prompted response - to a position I made clear in my first post when startiung this thread which is NO DIFFERENT to the position I took on my blog.
Christ this is frustrating.
BK - offers an prompt on blog. 4 commenters agree, one disgarees. 2 of the commenters are ex suiciders and the target audience for the camapign. All answering aware of my background and my opinion.
BK offers a promot on thread. Several commenters disagree. Don't know how many are target audience for CALM campaign. Most thread respondents answering aware of my background and opinion.
There. Is. No. Difference. Or very, very little.
Christ this is frustrating.
BK - offers an prompt on blog. 4 commenters agree, one disgarees. 2 of the commenters are ex suiciders and the target audience for the camapign. All answering aware of my background and my opinion.
BK offers a promot on thread. Several commenters disagree. Don't know how many are target audience for CALM campaign. Most thread respondents answering aware of my background and opinion.
There. Is. No. Difference. Or very, very little.
Georgie Porgie
made the boys cry too.
Badger Kitten said:No it isn't - you read my opening post here, how come your response is not a prompted response? There is no difference at all.
This is a different kind of forum, though. Your blog is that of a 7/7 survivor this is an open forum.
I think I'd agree with you more if this were an advert for a profit making product of some sort.... but the fact that it's for a charity means that they're allowed (IMO) to use shocking images as long as they are relatively within context.
Charities have a hard time getting noticed as it is.
Co-incidently as I was typing this a report came on the news about the fact that 'survivors and relatives of the dead' have condemend the advert.
Which I guess goes to show that for you it is offensive.. but maybe not to those un-connected directly with 7/7.
chegrimandi
associated with adultery
Jonti said:
oh - you know them?
Badger Kitten
oof
Well, I hope it does get the issue out, because it needs to be discussed.
Two people unconnected with 7/7 who have been affected by suicide have said they think it is a crap ad.They are the target audience, they think it is crap. Other members of the public have said it is crap.
Others have said differently.
I don't think anyone would wish the chairity not to raise the issue and I support them in that.
I do however, still think it is a shite ad. And this is the main reason why. Not the offence caused to people affected by 7/7, some of whom have considered suicide themselves. But because its basic proposition I think is wholly false.
Mass murder on a jihadi mission is not the same as suicide, not at all, and the young men they are trying to help are not at all like the bombers ie they are not plotting to cause maximum death and casualties to make a political point, they are contemplating ending their own lives, and just their own lives .
The 7/7 bombers are not considered ''suicidal young men'', that is not what they are known for: they are considered terrorist murderers. Homicide not suicde was their primary objective, and there are no reports of them being depressed or suicidal in way that makes them comporable to the near-1000 young men who died through suicide last year. None at all.
And therefore I think the whole premise of the ad is wrong, as well as being insensitive and likely to alienate the target audience.
'' Something killed a thousand young men last year. Not war, not disease, not accidents, not crime, not drugs. Suicide. The killer nobody is man enough to talk about'' or whatever would have been just as shocking, and far less likely to upset people, and it would still have got coverage.
Anyway, BBC is on it now.
Two people unconnected with 7/7 who have been affected by suicide have said they think it is a crap ad.They are the target audience, they think it is crap. Other members of the public have said it is crap.
Others have said differently.
I don't think anyone would wish the chairity not to raise the issue and I support them in that.
I do however, still think it is a shite ad. And this is the main reason why. Not the offence caused to people affected by 7/7, some of whom have considered suicide themselves. But because its basic proposition I think is wholly false.
Mass murder on a jihadi mission is not the same as suicide, not at all, and the young men they are trying to help are not at all like the bombers ie they are not plotting to cause maximum death and casualties to make a political point, they are contemplating ending their own lives, and just their own lives .
The 7/7 bombers are not considered ''suicidal young men'', that is not what they are known for: they are considered terrorist murderers. Homicide not suicde was their primary objective, and there are no reports of them being depressed or suicidal in way that makes them comporable to the near-1000 young men who died through suicide last year. None at all.
And therefore I think the whole premise of the ad is wrong, as well as being insensitive and likely to alienate the target audience.
'' Something killed a thousand young men last year. Not war, not disease, not accidents, not crime, not drugs. Suicide. The killer nobody is man enough to talk about'' or whatever would have been just as shocking, and far less likely to upset people, and it would still have got coverage.
Anyway, BBC is on it now.
Badger Kitten
oof
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
Badger Kitten said:Well I am sorry to link to a story in the Evil Standard, but the file of the pic is too big for me to upload, so here is the link.
CALM ( Campaign Against Living Miserably) is a charity seeking to raise awareness of suicide in young men. A praiseworthy initiative, I think. So what the fuck are they doing with this STUPID poster?
Poster shows:
Picture of exploded No.30 bus.
Strapline 'Last year, four suicidal British men got out attention. Unfortunately, 983 others didn't.'
At the bottom of the advertisement are the words 'help stop suicide'.
I think this is utterly crass for several reasons:
Apart from upsetting people including survivors and families, and other people affected by 7/7, some of whom may have considered suicide this last year, it is also likely to upset its target audience which is 15-35 year old young men ( specifically young men apparently) considering suicide.
If I was a suicidal young man, I would be extremely angry at any comparison with a suicide bomber. Homicide-suicide is not at all the same as suffering from a depressive illness which can make life unbearable.
They have chosen completely the wrong example to make a point.
I am sorry if it seems insensitive to raise this right now. I am very much in favour of getting help and support to anyone who is feeling depressed and considering suicide, and that is why internet sites, for example, can be incredibly helpful. I think CALM's aims are good. I cannot understand why Ogilvie and Mather came up with this creative. The tragic death of almost a thousand young men a year is shocking enough, without having to use mass murderers in the advertising campaign to make a point.
They didn't even run this in media specifically-targeted at young men. They are running it on billboards, all over the country, many of them in London as I understand it. So anyone can see it.
They said that they wanted to be ''controversial''. Stupid fuckers.
Anyway. What do you think? Is it a reasonable albeit shocking ad and am I over-reacting? Or is it crap?
i think it's time we moved on from the 7/7 bombs to be honest... more people were killed by the Usuk illegal invasion of iraq yet you don't have headline news and comfortable westerns screaming about the horrors of it becoming tv serials which have product placement in them (over there) or films with prodcut place ment in them (Jarhead) ... hell that's perfectly acceptable.... right...
load of shit... these things are not sacrisanct and are not untouchable ...
Badger Kitten
oof
Fine. Move on. This is not a sympathy thread, in fact, if I could have posted under another name I would hav d one, because the main point I am making is that suicide-homicide is not suicide and that is why, in my ex-profesional opinion, this is a shit ad.
I am not actually talking about 7/7 at all if you have a read: I am talking about suicide in young men and an anti suicide charity's advertising strategy? And why it feels the need to use 7/7 when it is not related to a problem that is shocking enough without cheap links to mass murder.
Do you see? No, you don't. Whatever.
I am not actually talking about 7/7 at all if you have a read: I am talking about suicide in young men and an anti suicide charity's advertising strategy? And why it feels the need to use 7/7 when it is not related to a problem that is shocking enough without cheap links to mass murder.
Do you see? No, you don't. Whatever.
fudgefactorfive
New Member
I have shock tactic adverts targetted at me every day. I turn on the TV and I have to watch small girls being mangled into impossible positions, complete with crunching sounds, just to raise awareness of road safety (I don't drive). In the 80s I had to look at people dying of AIDS with camera shots hovering lovingly over the infected sores on their arms. Now, according to national billboards, I "stink".
Join the club.
Fact is, the bombers used themselves as weapons because they thought the world is shit and they have no place in it. They were elated because they mistakenly believed they would be rewarded for suicide. You can't just move the goalposts on suicide because you don't think it's according enough respect to an event in the past that frankly never was the be-all and end-all of cultural existence and certainly isn't months and months and months later.
Join the club.
Fact is, the bombers used themselves as weapons because they thought the world is shit and they have no place in it. They were elated because they mistakenly believed they would be rewarded for suicide. You can't just move the goalposts on suicide because you don't think it's according enough respect to an event in the past that frankly never was the be-all and end-all of cultural existence and certainly isn't months and months and months later.
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
sorry but i see you aredrawing a comparison which you feel is vaild about something which isn't itself projecting that image quite a few people on this thread have poitned out that this isn't the comparison being made in great detaisl but you choose not to recognise this matter and instead fall back on the 7/7 is sacroscant and above use in this manner argument to claim it's cheapening the event by use in it's ads...Badger Kitten said:
Personally, knowing families of sucide bombers in other parts of the world i'd say that it's pretty fortunate that we have organisations who can talk to those who are as disspossed that they would take their own lives by stapping a bomb to themselves... i think it's greatly related.... these things do not and will not exisit inside of a vaccum and should not be sectioned off in the manner you are attempt to suggest...
wiskey
Albatross Admirer
Badger Kitten said:
in that case we as a society need to stop referring to them as 'suicide bombers'. a 'suicide bomber' would be someone who got depressed, strapped explosives to themselves went into a field and blew themselves up. they wouldnt kill anybody but themselves and perhaps a beetle or two.
who is the target audience? you seem to belive its young men. i dont think so. i think its everyone. young man who kill themselves do it under the noses of those who love them quite often, and although i think calm are doing good work in trying to persuade them to seek help i think its also trying to highlight that this happens and that there are warning signs to everyone.
suicide is a particularly emotive subject and one which almost everyone has something to say about. the reason the people on your blog have been ailienated may not actually be because of the image on the advert. i'm not suggesting this is the case but they could be upset that more wasnt done before their loved one killed themselves, they may be angry that no one tried to reach out to them when they felt low. they might feel shame (they shouldnt but people do), there are any number of reasons people will be upset by this.
Badger Kitten
oof
Actually I think you are wholly and wilfully misrepresenting absolutely everything I have said. What a shame. If I had logged in with a different username perhaops you would not have done so to wuite the extent that you have done here.
I have not said 7/7 was sacrosanct. Ever.
I have not ''moved the goalposts'' on suicide, and do not even know what that means.
I am saying that suicide is different to suicode homicide.
Do you remember Dunblane? Where the man killed the children then himself? Columbine? The Amish shooting?
These were homicides, acts of murder.
It is exactly the same. There is no reason to use the Columbine killers in an antisuicide ad, nor the 7/7 bombers, nor the Dunblane killer.
It is a bad comparative and a misleading message.
Therefore the ad is bad.
It is a shame you cannot get past my background to actually read what i am saying before posting your preconceieved prejudices all over the thread. I have repeatedly said I am not the target audience, what I have also repeatedly said is why I think the ad is poor.
But clearly you are unable or unwilling to actually read what I post. You have decided you already know what I am writing and why I am writing it.
This makes discussion rather pointless.
I have not said 7/7 was sacrosanct. Ever.
I have not ''moved the goalposts'' on suicide, and do not even know what that means.
I am saying that suicide is different to suicode homicide.
Do you remember Dunblane? Where the man killed the children then himself? Columbine? The Amish shooting?
These were homicides, acts of murder.
It is exactly the same. There is no reason to use the Columbine killers in an antisuicide ad, nor the 7/7 bombers, nor the Dunblane killer.
It is a bad comparative and a misleading message.
Therefore the ad is bad.
It is a shame you cannot get past my background to actually read what i am saying before posting your preconceieved prejudices all over the thread. I have repeatedly said I am not the target audience, what I have also repeatedly said is why I think the ad is poor.
But clearly you are unable or unwilling to actually read what I post. You have decided you already know what I am writing and why I am writing it.
This makes discussion rather pointless.
Badger Kitten
oof
wiskey said:
Wiskey, they both tried suicide themselves. They are therefore the primary target audience.
I checked with the press release about the target audience - primary 15-25 at-risk males, secondly, fund rasing.
I think they should be referred to as homicide-suicide bombers. Much as Dunblane is referred to as a homicide, or Columbine is referred to as a homicide. The killer also killed themselves: the tragedy and the crime was the mass murder of other people. Whether they kill people first, then themselves, or whether it is simultaneous is not the point: the point is mass murder.
That is the point I am trying to make with this bad ad.
Imagine I am not a 7/7 survivor. Talk to me as an ex advertising professional. That is how I am in fact writing on the thread.
fudgefactorfive
New Member
Badger Kitten said:
If you say so ... <unsubscribes>
Similar threads
