talkFORUM

warmleatherette wrote:

Roy Twing wrote:

warmleatherette wrote:

Royal24s wrote:

warmleatherette wrote:

Royal24s wrote:

Ralph wrote:

Royal24s wrote:

Ralph wrote:The advertising industry exists to sell us stuff (we don’t need). That’s it. Anyone seeing some other agenda is drifting into the realms of paranoia.

Ignoring the fact that there may well be additional agendas at work, don't you find the methodology at all worrying?

I’m concerned about the ability of incredibly wealthy zealots to spend as much as they like on social media influencing elections under a cloak of secrecy. That needs to be reigned in ASAP.

I’m not worried about too many pretend mixed race families in insurance & yoghurt adverts during episodes of Coronation Street. I’m baffled why anyone would be.

So basically propoganda is okay if it's promoting something you agree with but very bad if it's about something you disagree with.

Propaganda of what, promoting interracial relationships?

Which actually seems to answer my question to Ralph very honestly.
Propoganda is a very dishonest and undesirable practice. It's a weapon of war really and can be resorted to in that circumstance.
It really doesn't matter what anyone might intend or to achieve from its use , it's simply not a method which can or should be applied to civilians in peacetime for any reason

Answer the question don’t give me word salad.

Seemed to me to be pretty well answered.
The establishment believes that we would all be better off if we shared their view of a utopian future for the developed world, and they are making damned sure the message is being rammed down our throats from whatever source is available to them.
And as royal alluded to, - it doesn't matter if the message is an altruistic one, it is still social engineering.

More word salad, it’s a shame you haven’t got them balls to say what you mean, it’s pretty obvious to anyone with a half a brain...

And more attempted tarring - you 'virtue signallers' or whatever the trendy london bubble phrase of the moment is, are truly despicable.

“Tarring” would suggest you don’t broadcast what you mean with big neon signs dressed up as “debate” but when push comes to shove you’re just a coward like the rest of them...

Roy Twing wrote:And more attempted tarring - you 'virtue signallers' or whatever the trendy london bubble phrase of the moment is, are truly despicable.

Bullshit. He's just calling you out for the intolerant twat that you are.

warmleatherette wrote:“Tarring” would suggest you don’t broadcast what you mean with big neon signs dressed up as “debate” but when push comes to shove you’re just a coward like the rest of them...

warmleatherette wrote:

Royal24s wrote:

warmleatherette wrote:

Royal24s wrote:

Ralph wrote:

Royal24s wrote:

Ralph wrote:The advertising industry exists to sell us stuff (we don’t need). That’s it. Anyone seeing some other agenda is drifting into the realms of paranoia.

Ignoring the fact that there may well be additional agendas at work, don't you find the methodology at all worrying?

I’m concerned about the ability of incredibly wealthy zealots to spend as much as they like on social media influencing elections under a cloak of secrecy. That needs to be reigned in ASAP.

I’m not worried about too many pretend mixed race families in insurance & yoghurt adverts during episodes of Coronation Street. I’m baffled why anyone would be.

So basically propoganda is okay if it's promoting something you agree with but very bad if it's about something you disagree with.

Propaganda of what, promoting interracial relationships?

Which actually seems to answer my question to Ralph very honestly.
Propoganda is a very dishonest and undesirable practice. It's a weapon of war really and can be resorted to in that circumstance.
It really doesn't matter what anyone might intend or to achieve from its use , it's simply not a method which can or should be applied to civilians in peacetime for any reason

Answer the question don’t give me word salad.

Can propoganda promote interracial relationships ?
Yes of course it can.
My answer was perfectly clear though. It can promote anything you like but it seeks to do that subliminally and therefore it's dishonest and potentially very harmful.
Can't really put it any more clearly than that and I'm not going to get involved in some old bollocks about how I must be victimising the participants in interracial or any other sort of relationships by identifying the dangers of propoganda.

Royal24s wrote:

warmleatherette wrote:

Royal24s wrote:

warmleatherette wrote:

Royal24s wrote:

Ralph wrote:

Royal24s wrote:

Ralph wrote:The advertising industry exists to sell us stuff (we don’t need). That’s it. Anyone seeing some other agenda is drifting into the realms of paranoia.

Ignoring the fact that there may well be additional agendas at work, don't you find the methodology at all worrying?

I’m concerned about the ability of incredibly wealthy zealots to spend as much as they like on social media influencing elections under a cloak of secrecy. That needs to be reigned in ASAP.

I’m not worried about too many pretend mixed race families in insurance & yoghurt adverts during episodes of Coronation Street. I’m baffled why anyone would be.

So basically propoganda is okay if it's promoting something you agree with but very bad if it's about something you disagree with.

Propaganda of what, promoting interracial relationships?

Which actually seems to answer my question to Ralph very honestly.
Propoganda is a very dishonest and undesirable practice. It's a weapon of war really and can be resorted to in that circumstance.
It really doesn't matter what anyone might intend or to achieve from its use , it's simply not a method which can or should be applied to civilians in peacetime for any reason

Answer the question don’t give me word salad.

Can propoganda promote interracial relationships ?
Yes of course it can.
My answer was perfectly clear though. It can promote anything you like but it seeks to do that subliminally and therefore it's dishonest and potentially very harmful.
Can't really put it any more clearly than that and I'm not going to get involved in some old bollocks about how I must be victimising the participants in interracial or any other sort of relationships by identifying the dangers of propoganda.

At least you’ve the balls to admit that’s what you were getting at.

I didn't "admit" that's what I was getting at. If I'd meant that I've had said it. I was very clearly addressing the matter of propoganda itself not whatever trendy or sinister issue it is used to promote.
I wasn't getting at anything in fact. That was someone else and I was answering the question of why anyone would or could mislead the public, and how this might be related to, or involve commercial advertising.

This business of calling anyone you disagree with stupid, uneducated or even wicked is getting very tedious you know. It worked for New Labour in 1997 but people are onto it now and it doesn't carry much weight anymore

Ps. General comment there, not aimed at you personally

Royal24s wrote:Prompted by the thread on Syria and the general comment I made, I'm genuinely interested to know somerthing.
What do people here think about the commercials they see on TV ?
Do you like or enjoy any if them ?
Which ones do you find most informative and entertaining ?
Do you think they're pretty honest on the whole, and are you satisfied that this aspect is effectively monitored by the State for your protection ?

Sorry for ignoring the entirety of this thread, but I wanted to answer this specifically.

I remember most of them, but I almost never remember what they are advertising. So they are completely pointless.

subsub wrote:

Roy Twing wrote:And more attempted tarring - you 'virtue signallers' or whatever the trendy london bubble phrase of the moment is, are truly despicable.

Bullshit. He's just calling you out for the intolerant twat that you are.

And another one comes along to offer support.
No attempt to debate, - just the strawman/ad hominem.
Pathetic.

Roy Twing wrote:

subsub wrote:

Roy Twing wrote:And more attempted tarring - you 'virtue signallers' or whatever the trendy london bubble phrase of the moment is, are truly despicable.

Bullshit. He's just calling you out for the intolerant twat that you are.

And another one comes along to offer support.
No attempt to debate, - just the strawman/ad hominem.
Pathetic.

I’ll “debate” with you Roy, now we finished skirting around what it is you’re actually unhappy about, let’s start with an easy one, how many people do you think are affected by the blatant attempt to woo the public into entering relationships with people with different colored skin or from another culture therefore diluting the master race by stealth?

What sort of percentage do you think have been infected?

Go..

So TV/media/music isn't used for propaganda in many ways for many different reasons?

Simple question to anyone whom cares to address it.....open to all.

warmleatherette wrote:

Roy Twing wrote:

subsub wrote:

Roy Twing wrote:And more attempted tarring - you 'virtue signallers' or whatever the trendy london bubble phrase of the moment is, are truly despicable.

Bullshit. He's just calling you out for the intolerant twat that you are.

And another one comes along to offer support.
No attempt to debate, - just the strawman/ad hominem.
Pathetic.

I’ll “debate” with you Roy, now we finished skirting around what it is you’re actually unhappy about, let’s start with an easy one, how many people do think are affected by the blatant attempt to woo the public into entering relationships with people with different colored skin or from another culture therefore diluting the master race by stealth?

What sort of percentage do you think have been infected?

Go..

No ones said or suggested anything remotely like that except you.
The subject is advertising, how trustworthy it is and to what degree people are effected by it consciously or subconsciously.

Why do you keep trying to make it about "inter racial relationships" ?

Rossco wrote:So TV/media/music isn't used for propaganda in many ways for many different reasons?

Simple question to anyone whom cares to address it.....open to all.

Of course it is but this is a very specific question now we’ve stripped away the bullshit and word salad, the question is are the “media” showing families of mixed race/culture together to somehow brainwash the public into entering such relationships or to make them generally acceptable, it’s a weird one because it is acceptable to any normal human being but for some reason some people think it’s not and seem to be upset about it because it obviously gives them bad “feels”?

Royal24s wrote:

warmleatherette wrote:

Roy Twing wrote:

subsub wrote:

Roy Twing wrote:And more attempted tarring - you 'virtue signallers' or whatever the trendy london bubble phrase of the moment is, are truly despicable.

Bullshit. He's just calling you out for the intolerant twat that you are.

And another one comes along to offer support.
No attempt to debate, - just the strawman/ad hominem.
Pathetic.

I’ll “debate” with you Roy, now we finished skirting around what it is you’re actually unhappy about, let’s start with an easy one, how many people do think are affected by the blatant attempt to woo the public into entering relationships with people with different colored skin or from another culture therefore diluting the master race by stealth?

What sort of percentage do you think have been infected?

Go..

No ones said or suggested anything remotely like that except you.
The subject is advertising, how trustworthy it is and to what degree people are effected by it consciously or subconsciously.

Why do you keep trying to make it about "inter racial relationships" ?

Haha, I think we’ve established exactly what we’re talking about thank you, no need to try and twist or skirt around it, let’s be honest and upfront about it and use words that maybe unpalatable but clear and concise to the subject in hand.