In brief, the main forms of discrimination covered in this ad are deemed to be unpalatable by the vast majority of society.

However, ‘shape discrimination’ isn’t widely condemned in western society – therefore a viewer is open to having an adverse reaction to putting shape discrimination on a par with, say, racism.

I watched this ad and disagreed with its premise – I don’t think that someone treated like a second-class citizen for being black, is the same as someone who is laughed-at for being fat.

What would work, is if the ad demonstrated why such discrimination was wrong in the first place – e.g. how it affects ‘sufferers’. Thereby you would create some sort of empathic reaction.

Instead of coming here an insulting other posters, do you actually have anything constructive to add to the debate? Have you even looked at the JWT ad? Or is that acceptable because, let’s face it, the pitch is all a bit of a laugh really, isn’t it?

What was your point again?

Sober enough to see you can’t post anything more than cliched one-liners or links to the work of other people, you meat-head hack.

Since you clearly are on par with the same manner of meat-head that makes discriminatory jokes.

Besides which, AdGrunt, if most of the populace was as tired and boring as you, the few creative people left would need to be drunk 24/7 just to cope with YOUR lot.

Now go suck a tinnie and crawl back into your ute and wipe your wet nose on your wifebeater, you Bogan Butthead.

In context of the ad I would have no argument (wrong as it is) with joke 1 being used. Joke 2 is not the same type of discrimination… It’s NOT discriminating by referring to a stereotype… it was an actuality. And a horrific one. How do you think survivors and family of people who “went up the chimneys” would feel about that ad?
Now… what I said:
Anonmenon: “here’s the thing… it wasn’t just 6 million Jews… Fat, poofters, blacks all went up the chimneys too”
(sorry but I feel I have to spell out for you that I was intentionally using the derogatory names used in the actual ad… just in case)

What you said:
Andrew: “Here’s the thing, it wasn’t just Jews that were targeted, the homosexuals were also separated out as well as the gypsies, along with political opponents”

Sound familiar??… You are arguing my argument… with my argument! So thanks for repeating MY point.

And now to rebut what is by far the most stupid part of your post… Not once did I hint that “Jews” or any other sect are any less deserving of discrimination… and I certainly didn’t suggest that “all groups that are targeted be required to have millions die before they are heard” Are you serious??… YOU IDIOT!

But can be a standard meathead and merely swipe someone else’s work.

Nice one, AdGrunt. It exhibits the same “lack of firing neurons” indicative of the drongos that MAKE fat jokes.

One liners stolen from someone else are easy and wort less than a penny on the net. Get back to us when you can actually CREATE something in terms of a reply, you HACK.

Every politician and every free-to-air exec is creaming themselves in their pants/pantsuits right now.

Since clearly people arguing over “merit” have forgotten that advertising cannot – by dint of where the paychecks for advertising come from – accept that “merit” will never have any place in any advertising, even fake “for free” advertising to promote ones’s own advertising company on television.

On a station that disallows “advertising”.

Unless you are making a fake ad about advertising that augments the ratings (and even Aunty needs her ratings, so she can maintain budget). One that gets your ad company LOTS of attention, and probably will generate a lot of potential clients.

Especially after the “Coke does not rot your teeth” fiasco, deliberated on Gruen itself.

This, li’l Childrens, is a prime (or is that “7 Prime”?) example of viral advertising.

Which has been discussed and debated on Gruen before, so any reader of this thread unfamiliar with V.A. can shut the H–L up before offering a reply as braindead as “I want the drugs Little Man is on”.

Only *this* V.A. is 3 times more effective and clever, since Adam is using ANTI -commercial TV that makes FUN of viral adverts on the net to make an ad that is ONLY able to be shown on the net (totally viral) and then get massive buzz for the product…

which is NOT a product…

but Adam himself, his skills, in showing a product CONCEPT.
\
Anti viral to market virally in a non viral environment to spread the advert virus.

Deft, Adam, gorgeously deft.

Not apt, but deft.

God bless you and your hat, which despite previous comments, did not look like a condom.

It looked like one of the hats worn by a secondary character on Fat Albert, but not a condom.

(Choose your deity and insert here, as per all advertising) bless Adam.

# Anonmenon
15 May 09
7:55 am

I don’t like the “jew” joke. That’s more than discrimination… it is referring to a truly Horrific circumstance…. where 6 million jews were murdered for no good reason. I think you could argue it is still discrimination… but i think it takes it to a level it didn’t need to be taken. heres the thing… it wasn’t just 6 million jews… Fat, poofters, blacks all went up the chimneys too… you idiot!