|Children's Rhymes Turned into Global Warming Propaganda|
|Written by MS|
|Wednesday, 17 March 2010 22:49|
You may remember this delightful video that we've written about before:|
Now the same group has produced these ads that you've may have seen in the news this week:
939 complaints were lodged with the UK Advertising watchdog the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) against the ads the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) for these five advertisements all associated with the Act on CO2 campaign.
Even the ASA admits:
The number of individuals objecting to the ads is likely to have been higher; we advised subsequent enquirers whose points of complaint were already being investigated that they need not register a new complaint unless they wanted to.
The ASA found that the "Jack & Jill" and "Three Men in a Tub" ads were not delivered gently enough in their language when referencing the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stating:
Because, in a European context, there was a probability of greater than 90% for some events but a probability of greater than 50% for other events and because all statements about future climate conditions were based on modelled predictions, which the IPCC report itself stated still involved uncertainties in the magnitude and timing, as well as regional details, of predicted climate change, we concluded that the claim "Extreme weather events such as storms, floods and heatwaves will become more frequent and intense" in ad (b) and the claim "extreme weather conditions such as flooding, heat waves and storms will become more frequent and intense" in ad (c) should have been phrased more tentatively to reflect that.
During the hearings on the ads, the DECC stated that "there was no intention to shock or distress any viewer," but also acknowledged, "This new series of ads aimed to get people to engage with the issue and seriously consider changing their behaviour in order to help contribute to a reduction of the UK's emissions overall." But given Clearcast, a voluntary creative reviewer for advertising bodies, cleared the script of each ad for adherence to the British Committee for Advertising Practice and 939 complaints were still filed with the ASA, questions remain: Who is the best judge of good versus menacing advertising? Do strictly enforced advertising guidelines simply mask the fact that this is political, fear mongering content and those who are willing to to speak out against such content are being brushed aside in a bureaucratic process?
Both the "Jack & Jill" and "Rub adub dub" ads were banned by the ASA, but you can still expect to see the "Story Time", "Twinkle, twinkle", and "Hey, diddle, diddle" ads in circulation.
In response to the ruling the DECC has declared complete vindication stating on their primary site, "The ASA has comprehensively vindicated the accuracy of the TV advert we made and rebuffed those who attempted to use the advertising standards process to question the reality of manmade climate change... We will continue to provide public information about the dangers of climate change."
It's a good thing US consumers are far more outspoken in their dissatisfaction with advertising content and get much better than a bureaucratic review of ads by large governing bodies. As for the propaganda still in circulation in the UK, we encourage you to keep complaining.
Share this page on your favorite Social Websites...