Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Gruen… The Missing Add

Discussion in 'The Pub' started by FALCON-LORD, May 14, 2009.

  1. As a watcher of the Gruen transfer I find they sometimes have some really good content.
    On this weeks episode there was an Add made for “The Pitch†(A segment where they get two add agencies to make an add to sell the unsellable). This add didn’t make it past the ABC’s internal reviews.
    Personally I think it was an interesting angle, and a very interesting debate on the subject afterwards.
    I personally think the only flaw in the add is that some bigots would see it as vindicating there view (As was pointed out by one of the panellists), but I think it addresses the content in a head on and effective manner.
    I thought seeing we have so many people with a very distinct view of the world I’d post it here and see what conversation/debate it brings up.

  2. For me personally, it brings to mind the differences between what we see/hear on telly and what we see/hear in real life. If one of my mates told me one of those jokes, it would definately be less confronting/surprising than seeing it on the telly. I guess that's because we are used to 'watered down' stuff on telly due to ethical guidelines and what not.

    Not sure how I feel about the ad itself though, kinda just relies on shock value and dosen't really go anywhere about 'fat pride', apart from the phrase at the end.

  3. I think it's ok, a bit of a shock, which was the intention of the ad.

    But the viewing public is a little more sensitive.

    One thing is for sure, kids will use those jokes at school on a daily basis without being told off. Maybe if they see an ad like this they may come to the realization that it's not the way to go.

    Acutally having said all that, I doubt we will ever see fat discrimination on the same level as racisim. just not going to happen.
  4. The whole point was moot for me. They totally missed the point with this ad. I can see what they were trying to do and I can understand the shock tactic, but the whole concept is flawed.

    People can't help being black, gay, etc. - they can help being overweight.

    Prejudice is ugly in any case, but prejudice against black people or gay people is a world away from prejudice against fat people.
  5. 1st, cheers FL for chucking this link up. When I heard about it, I went searching for the ad to see for myself but couldn't find it.

    Discrimination is not wrong.
    We do it all the time. It is necessary for survival and wise decision making.

    Anyone seeking to abolish prejudice and discrimination 100%, is a moron.

    Obesity, ESPECIALLY in a country with a publically subsidised health-care system, is not a righteous moral position for the pursuit of perfectly equal treatment.
    It is an indication of substandard health, same as emphysema and liver-failure... and we have legislative discrimination against smokers and drinkers, in that we tax the hell out of those 'lifetsyle choices'.

    The ad itself, I believe, comes from an idiot position.
    Fine and dandy for it to 'discuss' an interesting issue, but that guy who made it seems to sincerely believe any discrimination is wrong - including general obesity.

    That makes him socially over-conscious to the point of wasting space and oxygen, IMO.

    As an aside: the Jew joke was a simple brutal take on a piece of history, presented in a fashion designed to offend ANYONE'S sensibilities - not necessarily an example of racial prejudice.
    And alcohol being invented so fat chicks could get laid?
    Crap. 'Fat chicks' are used as an example to fit the situation. Alcohol helps ugly people get laid. No ad is going to remarket the laws of attraction, and I don't see any ugle/fat/stupid people being denied the same human rights as anyone else... but what? they want to be attractive instead of unattractive?

    That's cool, they can hit the salads and the treadmill.
  6. I love the Gruen Transfer (and even better Spicks and Specks before it). I am in two minds about the ad, but it certainly provokes discussion! The show itself is always worth watching and a great insight into that field. The best thing is that the ABC finally has some shows that make it compulsory watching, especially on Wednesday night!
  7. And stupid gratuitous comments like "bonk's" are exactly what this is all about.

    Get a life.
  8. Michael Jackson and Ian Thorpe come to mind
  9. I thought it was an interesting ad, but the guy who made it seemed to then invent reasons for it, after the event. They seemed a little contrived.

    But anything that provokes discussion has to be a good thing?
  10. Has no one ever seen a comedian ??
  11. Yeah, but even a comedian has to draw a line somewhere.

    Apparently, when the ad was played, the whole audience was dumbstruck, deadly silence. I think that was the cue that this was perhaps a little over the line.
  12. I know heaps better Jewish jokes than that.
  13. What part of my post do you have issue with?
  14. For me it started on the third line.
  15. With "Discrimination is not wrong." ?

    "You are walking in the city at night. There is a short-cut to a meeting point where your friends are, through an alley-way. You see a group of young Aboriginal/Lebanese men down that alley-way.
    If you don't go down that alley, are you racist?"
  16. they could be white, yellow or pink for all i care i still wouldn't walk down the alley way.
  17. Why not?
  18. Alleyways are notorious for bashings despite who may be lurking in there.
    If anything we are now discriminating against alleyways at night not the people in them.
  19. Exactly.
  20. So, incidents in some alleyways in the past has created a stereotype or stigma about them, whereby society generally views them as much more dangerous than a well-lit street.
    Even though not all alleyways are dangerous, and indeed, some alleyways may be safer than well-lit streets - we decide there is a sensible difference and avoid an alleyway even though we don't actually know whether it's dangerous or not, because it's smarter not to even take the risk (everyone knows it, after all).

    Is this correct?