What do you think of this?
Here's the ad:
Even Richard Dawkins thinks it should be screened.
What do you think of this?
Here's the ad:
Even Richard Dawkins thinks it should be screened.
Isn't that more or less what any advert does?The Church of England is arrogant to imagine it has an automatic right to foist its opinions upon a captive audience who have paid good money for a completely different experience.
It's not like the advert was particularly pushy towards the Church of England.
If it's a paid ad, I can't see the harm
Appeasing all the young Islamists that ruin your cinematic experience.
It's just cinema chains deciding not to show it rather than a ban, isn't it? Were it the latter it would definitely be bollocks, but as we've touched on various times in politics threads it's pretty common for big companies to rule against political or religious stuff.
They're advertising a product just like anyone else so I don't see why it shouldn't be shown.
What's the product? They seemed to claim it was for the website but the URL doesn't even appear in the advert.
These companies have established advertising policies that rule against any political or religious promotion, and this clearly falls under that umbrella.
Presumably the product is religion.
If they have a blanket rule against advertisements with religious content (which they apparently do), then there's no issue of discrimination.
Beyond that, it's their prerogative what they show or not. If they don't want to air religious advertising, that's their call.
Presumably whichever church made it is advertising itself, like all churches they sell salvation or peace of mind (I've never attended so you'd have to ask someone who does exactly what they get out of it).Originally Posted by Toby
If they don't allow religious advertising what's the hoohah about? If there is one.
But again it doesn't actually mention the Church of England at any point. It's promoting prayer in the most general terms possible.
I don't think there has been much hoohah other than dolts like Dawkins thinking it's somehow a freedom of speech infringement.
There's not one on that ad I linked but I saw it somewhere else and it had a little Church of England thing on it at the end.
This one. Also, BoJo and Cameron saying 'banning' it is ridiculous.
It's an odd idea for an advert, really.
Religion > dying of heart disease and causing a strain on Our NHS, so why do they sell crisps at cinemas? Hypocrites.
So it's like one of those lifestyle ads that isn't specifically pushing anything, just promoting brand awareness etc. Or an even better analogy, promotional bodies advertising milk or beef or other generic things that their members produce.
It's still advertising.
That's not a better analogy. It's not like those, because they promote the actual sale of something, not personal beliefs which these companies (like pretty much every major company involved in any way with sponsorship or advertising) have chosen not to allow.
The health awareness things are a better comparison as they're intangible and just asking people to do something differently, but it's obviously just private companies seeking to protect their reputation. People are idiots and associate an advert they don't like with the person who showed it to them.
I didn't say otherwise.It's still advertising.
I actually think it's a really good ad. They've probably done better out of it than if the cinemas had just shown it to begin with, so everybody wins really.
Oh I agree, it's a well-done advert. It's just odd to advertise praying, I think. Maybe they're hoping to get to lapsed / non-active 'christians'.
They have a policy not to screen political or religious ads. Next.
It'd annoy me if I saw it. Not so much the prayer itself but the 'prayer is for everyone' line especially. Prayer is not for everyone and they know that.
Call it promotion then rather than advertising, they're promoting their beliefs in the hope you'll come to their church rather than directly flogging Bible 2.0 or super-duper communion accessories.
The ultimate aim of any campaign like this is to get more people interested in your organisation. For a church that could be bums on seats, money in the donation box, or simply a tick on the census.
Okay, and they're promoting religious activity, which runs contrary to the broadcaster's policies.
Which is fine, I was just answering your question on what they were selling.
I'm torn on whether churches should be treated like any other business or left as they are. In a way I'd like to see them lose things like tax exemptions and other special treatment (because most of them are unjustified) but I'm not sure fully commercialised religion would be a great idea either.
They've been commercial since the day they started, they just haven't moved with the times in the last 30 years because they had 100% saturation until relatively recently. This context for using the word "ban" is just the next phase in their all new victimisation / persecution narrative.
Watching it just made me bored and reminded me that I was forced for 12 or so years to recite the words so that coupled with religious observance doctrine means, at the moment, they are very unlikely to "miss" their advertising much given their state sanctioned sanctimony at every other incident in public life.
Imagine if they started screening political ads in the cinema. Blergh.
Should interrupt the film for it I reckon. Stick this in halfway through a Bruce Willis effort.
God somebody please end the fucking ukulele whistling.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote