Do you find these billboards offensive?

Zulu

validusername1 wrote: »

there is not always a better answer. that's just stupid to suggest ...

Indeed, their opinions is stupider. ...of course they'd say the same of your opinion so it cancels out really.

OldNotWIse

Zulu wrote: »

Indeed, their opinions is stupider. ...of course they'd say the same of your opinion so it cancels out really.

Exactly, how can an opinion be "stupid" anyway??

OldNotWIse

Shenshen wrote: »

Show me the car manufacturer that is allowed to use a slogan like "the best car in the world".
That slogan would break advertisment laws.

Danone can't make those claims anywhere in Europe, because they have nothing to back them up with. It would be a lie, and thus is illegal in advertisement.

I'm remembering something about..."the best built cars in the world"... Toyota??? Not sure...

Shenshen

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Exactly, how can an opinion be "stupid" anyway??

An opinion can't be, really. It can at best be ill-informed.
Stating a fact that is incorrect, however...

Lux23

I think they are p**s poor to be honest but I can imagine if you are grappling with an unplanned pregnancy it would be pretty horrible.

Shenshen

Ok, in order to ad a little substance to this thread, I found the following :

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/consumer_affairs/consumer_protection/consumer_rights/consumer_advertising.html

"In particular this Act protects consumers from misleading advertisements..."

"For example, if they conceal or leave out important facts. (Example: '50% off everything' - really only applies to certain items). Advertisements are also considered misleading if they create a false impression even if everything stated in the advertisement may be literally true. "

sbsquarepants

finty wrote: »

This of course is only your opinion.

Their opinion is that there is "always" a better option.

What makes it a lie?
It's an opinion. It can be misguided, unreasonable and incorrect but if they believe it, it isn't a lie.

So no sbsquarepants, its not obvious!!

No it's not my opinion. It's the truth.
People believe all kinds of crazy things, beliefs are neither here nor there. Facts are facts, beliefs are beliefs, don't confuse the two, you can change your beliefs a hundred times, the facts remain the facts regardless.
If they had said, we believe there is always a better way, or in our opinion there is a better way, then that would be ok, but they didn't. They stated it as a fact, and as a fact it is quite clearly wrong.
Stating something as fact, which is plainly not fact, is called a lie.

Zulu

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Exactly, how can an opinion be "stupid" anyway??

That's kind of my point.

Shenshen wrote: »

An opinion can't be, really. It can at best be ill-informed.
Stating a fact that is incorrect, however...

It isn't a fact & I don't think they are claiming it is. At a guess, it's more accurately described, as a definitive statement.

Zulu

sbsquarepants wrote: »

They stated it as a fact, and as a fact it is quite clearly wrong.
Stating something as fact, which is plainly not fact, is called a lie.

Sorry but I seem to have missed the part where they claimed it as a fact. Clearly that's a game changer. Can you point out the same? (or are you, as I suspect, confusing a definitive statement with a fact?)

Son Of A Vidic

LisaLee wrote: »

Do you find these billboards offensive?

Why? How is that ad possibly offensive? Have we now reached a point, where any opposing opinion is deemed unacceptable and offensive? Is one not allowed to express an opinion outside of the 'herd'?

Shenshen

Zulu wrote: »

It isn't a fact & I don't think they are claiming it is. At a guess, it's more accurately described, as a definitive statement.

Not being a native speaker, I tried to find a definition of "definitive statement", to see how it differs from "fact".

All I found is :

"A definitive statement is a legal textual record which accompanies the definitive map. The definitive statement gives descriptions of the public rights of way, including any limitations or conditions. The definitive statement for each right of way describes the route and any restrictions on its use."

http://uk.ask.com/question/what-is-a-definitive-statement

I have to now assume that you are trying to confuse the issue by inventing vocabulary.

sbsquarepants

Zulu wrote: »

Sorry but I seem to have missed the part where they claimed it as a fact. Clearly that's a game changer. Can you point out the same? (or are you, as I suspect, confusing a definitive statement with a fact?)

Can you point out where they said it was only an opinion?

Surely an opinion needs some sort of indicator to differentiate it from a statement of fact?
Something along the lines of, i believe that....., or in my opinion......, as far as i know..... something like that which indicates it's an opinion.

It's always hot in Spain - statement of fact and clearly wrong. A lie in other words. If the spanish tourist board put up a billboard saying this they would be rightly condemned.
I think it's always hot in Spain - statement of belief. Still wrong, but it's an error moreso than a lie.

OldNotWIse

Zulu wrote: »

That's kind of my point.
.

I was kind of agreeing with you

sbsquarepants

Shenshen wrote: »

Not being a native speaker, I tried to find a definition of "definitive statement", to see how it differs from "fact".

I have to now assume that you are trying to confuse the issue by inventing vocabulary.

That's basically what he's doing alright.
It's like Bill Clinton - he stated clearly that he "did not have sexual relations" with Monica Lewinsky. When that was found out to be a bare faced lie, he tried to weasel out on a technicality over what the exact deifinition of sexual relations was.
Apparently, in the Clinton dictionary, sticking your knob down an interns throat didn't fall under the definition of "sexual relations"
Of course he was lying through his teeth back then, just like youth defence are now.

OldNotWIse

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Why? How is that ad possibly offensive? Have we now reached a point, where any opposing opinion is deemed unacceptable and offensive? Is one not allowed to express an opinion outside of the 'herd'?

Why? Because some people are very easily offended

How is that ad possibly offensive? Because it portrays a stance on abortion opposed to that of the people who are offended

Have we now reached a point, where any opposing opinion is deemed unacceptable and offensive? Yes

Is one not allowed to express an opinion outside of the 'herd'? No

Zulu

Shenshen wrote: »

I have to now assume that you are trying to confuse the issue by inventing vocabulary.

If you don't know it, it doesn't exist? Really? Thats what you are resorting to?

Ok; where have they claimed it's a fact?

The only assumption being made here is that they are claiming the statement is a fact. Considering a fact is something that's provable, and considering that they haven't claimed its a fact on the poster (from what I can see), who'd believe it's a fact?

"Old age isn't a problem, loneliness is" don't confuse this with a fact. It a statement, it's a definite statement, it's not a fact. Old age is a problem. Offended?

"Dublin does fridays like Amsterdam does munchies". Dublin doesn't do anything it's a place. Don't confuse this with a fact either. Offended?

"Flourish on Guinness"? I think not. If you only consumed Guinness you wouldn't flourish. More "lies presented as facts"? Nope. Offended?

OldNotWIse

I noticed the other day that my can of diet coke, which is advertised as "calorie free" actually has one calorie in it (not that it makes much difference) but this has me thinking now, is there (and I would bet money that there is) some kind of "licence" in marketing and advertising where if the exception is negligible (in respect of the overall figures - before you all start barking about rape victims not being "negligible - I am talking purely figures) that the company can make the claim?? Maybe not, just a thought...

Shenshen

Zulu wrote: »

If you don't know it, it doesn't exist? Really? Thats what you are resorting to?

Not really, hence the - rather extensive - online search for possible definitions.

I'm also finding it highly interesting that you so far have chosen to completely ignore the post I made earlier about the legal framework regarding misleading advertising.

Zulu

sbsquarepants wrote: »

That's basically what he's doing alright.
It's like Bill Clinton ...found out to be a bare faced lie, he tried to weasel out on a technicality.

Sigh. Nothing screams lost argument like an ad-hominem attack, and dodging direct questions.

Shenshen

OldNotWIse wrote: »

I noticed the other day that my can of diet coke, which is advertised as "calorie free" actually has one calorie in it (not that it makes much difference) but this has me thinking now, is there (and I would bet money that there is) some kind of "licence" in marketing and advertising where if the exception is negligible (in respect of the overall figures - before you all start barking about rape victims not being "negligible - I am talking purely figures) that the company can make the claim?? Maybe not, just a thought...

Am I really the only one on here able to use google?

According to snopes.com, food and drink with less than 5 calories per serving can legally be advertised as "Calorie Free".

Anything above that, and yes, you could sue them.

Zulu

Shenshen wrote: »

I'm also finding it highly interesting that you so far have chosen to completely ignore the post I made earlier about the legal framework regarding misleading advertising.

Why is it interesting? What did you expect from me? You state legal framework. Are you expecting me to disagree with that?

I don't disagree with the framework you posted?

OldNotWIse

Shenshen wrote: »

Not really, hence the - rather extensive - online search for possible definitions.

I'm also finding it highly interesting that you so far have chosen to completely ignore the post I made earlier about the legal framework regarding misleading advertising.

Shensen you accuse others of ignoring your posts. I am still waiting for a comment on post 184.

Deus Ex Machina

eh how r they ofensive ads? people should know the dangers of abortions before they try one. an abortions are murder of a child so some mothers are worried about them...

Zulu

Shenshen wrote: »

Am I really the only one on here able to use google?

According to snopes.com, food and drink with less than 5 calories per serving can legally be advertised as "Calorie Free".

Anything above that, and yes, you could sue them.

Wouldn't that be american law though? or is snopes Irish based?

Shenshen

Zulu wrote: »

Sigh. Nothing screams lost argument like an ad-hominem attack, and dodging direct questions.

Ad Hominem :

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html

We haven't deismissed your argument on the basis that you may be from Dublin, or possibly hold a driver's license.
We've dismissed it because the argument was incorrect due to using a phrase about right of way completely out of context.

OldNotWIse

Shenshen wrote: »

Am I really the only one on here able to use google?

According to snopes.com, food and drink with less than 5 calories per serving can legally be advertised as "Calorie Free".

Anything above that, and yes, you could sue them.

I dont like to live my life by the "bible" of google

Not interested in taking a case against them, just curious as to the discrepancy. I am sure there is a clause that allows these discrepancies (and not just for food and drinks). Maybe I'll google it

sbsquarepants

Zulu wrote: »

Sigh. Nothing screams lost argument like an ad-hominem attack, and dodging direct questions.

It's not an ad hominen. It's an example of a similarity in trying to weasel out on technicalities.

There is always a better option.
There is never a better option.

Is there any difference in how those two sentences are constructed?

If i was to fund a billboard saying. "Abortion is cool. There is never a better option." If your definition was correct that would be every bit as acceptable and truthfull as the youth defence one.
That's clearly bollox.

Zulu

Shenshen wrote: »

Ad Hominem :

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. .

Seriously, W.T.F. Pointing out that I'm like Bill Clinton found out to be a bare faced lie, trying to weasel out on a technicality is an ad-hominem attack.

Shenshen

Zulu wrote: »

Wouldn't that be american law though? or is snopes Irish based?

It's US American. I'm trying to find information about the EU, but from what I can tell t he guidelines are identical.

Shenshen

OldNotWIse wrote: »

I'm remembering something about..."the best built cars in the world"... Toyota??? Not sure...

This is the one you wanted me to reply to? I asked you for an example of European advertising with that slogan... and yes, I did go an look for it.
The slogan was used in the US, not here.