Oh dear - "wear a helmet" advert just aired on Channel 4



C

Call me Bob

Guest
Did anyone else see that just now? A quite lengthy advert on Channel 4
promoting cycle helmet use.

It was a montage of various (mostly sporting) cycling activity, with
an energetic music soundtrack. Riders, all in helmets, racing on road
bikes, jumping ramps on BMX's, tackling trails on MTB's and also a
couple of people on the road cycling "normally" with the traffic. All
of this inter-spliced with scenes of a man in a white lab coat working
with a test rig testing different helmets.

The message seemed to be "look how cool we all are, enjoying our cool
cycling activities in our cool helmets which the boffins have
carefully tested to make sure we're well protected."

One scene was quite peculiar, a shot of the commuting type cyclists
riding so close to the kerb that they had to swerve sharply around a
drain in the gutter. I'm not sure what the point of that was... maybe
"look how hazardous it can even be here on the road, dangerous
obstacles everywhere! You don't just need your helmet when doing the
sporty stuff!" Can anyone say... primary road position?

Advert ended with the THINK BIKE type logo, modified to say "THINK.
Wearing helmets makes sense, wear one!"

Oh dear oh dear.

Incidently, I want to pre-empt all the guffaws and smirking at my
daytime TV watching expense, by explaining it was just before the
documentary The Unteachables which I wanted to see. Ahem. Thank you,
carry on.

"Bob"
--

Email address is spam trapped, to reply directly remove the beverage.
 
Call me Bob wrote:

> Did anyone else see that just now? A quite lengthy advert on Channel 4
> promoting cycle helmet use.


Presumably, by airing at this time of day, they are targeting housewives?
 
<snipped>

> Advert ended with the THINK BIKE type logo, modified to say "THINK.
> Wearing helmets makes sense, wear one!"


Saw an advertisement with a similar tag line on the back of a bus here in
Belfast yesterday morning!

David

--
[email protected]
 
Call me Bob wrote:
> Did anyone else see that just now? A quite lengthy advert on Channel 4
> promoting cycle helmet use.


Nope. Don't have a gogglebox, let alone watch one.

But from your description, it sounds like the acceptable face of
martlehats. Persuasion, not compulsion - and happy images rather
than anything ghoulish. This is, after all, the whole purpose of
commercial advertising.

It _was_ paid, commercial advertising, yesno?

--
not me guv
 
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 11:35:14 +0000, Nick Kew <[email protected]> wrote:
> Call me Bob wrote:
>> Did anyone else see that just now? A quite lengthy advert on Channel 4
>> promoting cycle helmet use.

>
> Nope. Don't have a gogglebox, let alone watch one.
>
> But from your description, it sounds like the acceptable face of
> martlehats. Persuasion, not compulsion - and happy images rather
> than anything ghoulish. This is, after all, the whole purpose of
> commercial advertising.


Commercial advertising? Doesn't all the Think! stuff come from the DFT
then? Same as the ghoulish Cyclesense website with the Xray heads and the
extremely poor use of figures.

--
Andy Leighton => [email protected]
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_
 
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 11:35:14 +0000, Nick Kew
<[email protected]> wrote:

>> Did anyone else see that just now? A quite lengthy advert on Channel 4
>> promoting cycle helmet use.


>But from your description, it sounds like the acceptable face of
>martlehats. Persuasion, not compulsion - and happy images rather
>than anything ghoulish. This is, after all, the whole purpose of
>commercial advertising.
>
>It _was_ paid, commercial advertising, yesno?


No, this wasn't an advert from a commercial helmet manufacturer, it
was a public information, road safety type broadcast (oh the irony).



"Bob"
--

Email address is spam trapped, to reply directly remove the beverage.
 
>>
>>It _was_ paid, commercial advertising, yesno?

>
> No, this wasn't an advert from a commercial helmet manufacturer, it
> was a public information, road safety type broadcast (oh the irony).
>

Paid for with your *tax money*!

Even if C4 are giving away airtime for COIs[1] or its an Ofcom requirement
that all broadcasters set aside free airtime for them, the cost of making
COI itself would have been paid for from public funds.

Alex

[1] COI = modern term for a PIF (public information film) because they are
commissioned by the Central Office of Information

--
Mr R@T / General Lighting
Ipswich, Suffolk, Untied Kingdom
http://www.partyvibe.com
 
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 12:18:26 GMT someone who may be Call me Bob
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>No, this wasn't an advert from a commercial helmet manufacturer, it
>was a public information, road safety type broadcast (oh the irony).


Surely a public misinformation broadcast.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54
 
Mr R@t (2.30 zulu-india) wrote:
>>>It _was_ paid, commercial advertising, yesno?

>>
>>No, this wasn't an advert from a commercial helmet manufacturer, it
>>was a public information, road safety type broadcast (oh the irony).
>>

>
> Paid for with your *tax money*!


Bah.

Still, I daresay it's a drop in the ocean compared to what they
spend on the armaments industries trade shows in yugoslavia, iraq, etc.

--
not me guv
 
in message <[email protected]>, Call me Bob
('[email protected]') wrote:

> On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 11:35:14 +0000, Nick Kew
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> Did anyone else see that just now? A quite lengthy advert on Channel
>>> 4 promoting cycle helmet use.

>
>>But from your description, it sounds like the acceptable face of
>>martlehats. Persuasion, not compulsion - and happy images rather
>>than anything ghoulish. This is, after all, the whole purpose of
>>commercial advertising.
>>
>>It _was_ paid, commercial advertising, yesno?

>
> No, this wasn't an advert from a commercial helmet manufacturer, it
> was a public information, road safety type broadcast (oh the irony).


Any idea to whom we complain?

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they
;; do it from  religious conviction."          -- Pascal
 
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 17:59:05 +0000, Simon Brooke <[email protected]> wrote:
> in message <[email protected]>, Call me Bob
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 11:35:14 +0000, Nick Kew
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>> Did anyone else see that just now? A quite lengthy advert on Channel
>>>> 4 promoting cycle helmet use.

>>
>>>But from your description, it sounds like the acceptable face of
>>>martlehats. Persuasion, not compulsion - and happy images rather
>>>than anything ghoulish. This is, after all, the whole purpose of
>>>commercial advertising.
>>>
>>>It _was_ paid, commercial advertising, yesno?

>>
>> No, this wasn't an advert from a commercial helmet manufacturer, it
>> was a public information, road safety type broadcast (oh the irony).

>
> Any idea to whom we complain?


Presumably your MP. It is all controlled by the DFT isn't it. However
be aware that the Think! brand of advertising is seen as very successful
and has won many awards so that there may well be some reluctance to
make any changes.

--
Andy Leighton => [email protected]
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_
 
Whats the problem? Helmets are a safety device. Why not welcome them to be encouraged?
 
MichaelB wrote:
> Whats the problem? Helmets are a safety device. Why not welcome them
> to be encouraged?


Your second sentence is a contraversial point, by no means is their
unanimity on their effectiveness.

Google will produce the previous discussions, and pre-empt the next one.


- Nigel


--
Nigel Cliffe,
Webmaster at http://www.2mm.org.uk/
 
On Tue, 21 Mar 2006 17:59:05 +0000, Simon Brooke
<[email protected]> wrote:

>>>> Did anyone else see that just now? A quite lengthy advert on Channel
>>>> 4 promoting cycle helmet use.


>Any idea to whom we complain?


There was a web url given at the end of the ad but I wasn't quick
enough to get it unfortunately. I wouldn't know myself who is directly
responsible for this kind of thing, they could probably be tracked
down via MP / Department for Transport though.

"Bob"
--

Email address is spam trapped, to reply directly remove the beverage.
 
Andy Leighton wrote:

> Presumably your MP. It is all controlled by the DFT isn't it. However
> be aware that the Think! brand of advertising is seen as very successful
> and has won many awards so that there may well be some reluctance to
> make any changes.


How about a change of tactics to:

"Think! Really thinking about things makes sense!"

Do you think we could sell them on that? ;-/

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
"MichaelB" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Whats the problem? Helmets are a safety device. Why not welcome them
> to be encouraged?


Rubbish, they`re part of a uniform like a horse riding cap and just as
useless.....
wear a crash helmet, it may give you some protection !!!... fact......

Lee....

>
> --
> MichaelB
>
 
In article <[email protected]>, Simon
Brooke ([email protected]) wrote:
> in message <[email protected]>, MichaelB
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
> > Whats the problem? Helmets are a safety device. Why not welcome them
> > to be encouraged?

>
> Poor troll.


Tsk, Simon, did you not notice that it says "no-
mx.forums.cyclingforums.com"? Have pity on the poor fellow.

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
und keine Eie.
 
Nigel Cliffe wrote:
> MichaelB wrote:
>> Whats the problem? Helmets are a safety device. Why not welcome
>> them to be encouraged?

>
> Your second sentence is a contraversial point,


It depends. The VAT man thinks so. But then he wanted to call Jaffa cakes
biscuits, so what does he know?
--
Ambrose
 

Similar threads

J
Replies
0
Views
508
J
B
Replies
0
Views
532
B
J
Replies
0
Views
462
UK and Europe
Just zis Guy, you know?
J