Guest guest Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 Dear Azam, I was not aware that i was " defending " anything. Merely explaining a fact of life. If you are launching a campaign against irresponsible advertising, i am happy to support it. There is no call for people to label each other, i work round the clock for animals. But i have yet to meet someone who takes such ads seriously and that is all i was telling you, NOT that i support them. Perhaps my communication was unclear, for which i must apologise!! devika - AZAM SIDDIQUI devika khazvini ; Pablo Cc: aapn Tuesday, August 21, 2007 11:37 AM Re: Digest Number 2596 It is always sad to pick up a debate with an animal person, considering the fact that despite being on the same platform we tend to differ on issues which are so simple and straight. Issues which do not call for a debate at all. But having said that I would only like to Ms. Devika not the animal person but the creative professional, someone who has been in the field of advertising in India for 25yrs long and yet sees no harm defending such a nonsensical and damaging TVC, which by now most of our AAPN members and people worldwide have probably seen on the youtube link that was given in my earlier mail. I work for the electronic news media as a camera person in a national television channel of India. I am in this profession for past 8years. In the eight years of my service in the northeastern region of India, I have unfortunately been covering massacres, killings, blasts, rapes, murders, child abuse etc much much more than other happy stories. Now that is because those are burning issues which demand more attention. There is something called 'Corporate Social Responsibility' which an organisation or an individual whose target audience is the common public has to adhere to, and it is a must. A responsible media house will never show the face of the woman or a child who is a victim of rape. We cannot, and now even the Supreme Court of India has issues strict orders on such matters. I am always reminded by my organisation to be extremely careful in taking pictures of blasts and massacres where bodies and body parts are strewn all over. Even if I manage to shoot horrifying and gruesome pictures it does not get aired. Now why does an organisation pay so much attention to all this? Because you are responsible. Because your medium reaches the homes of millions of people. Because there are children watching television. ....and for many such becauses that can go on and on.. Now another important fact. Indian is not a Banana republic. You can not do anything and everything and get away or go unchecked. If you can recall that very recently two entertainment television news channels 'AXN' and 'F-Tv' were banned in India by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India for showing flesh. And mind you this flesh was not of blast ripped bodies of humans in massacres but of lively and mind blowing top models who perhaps were walking nude or posing for photographs. Now perhaps you may ask why is the Government keeps mum when it comes to speak for animal rights. Well because the minority called animal people is so so divided when it comes to raising issues of interest that Governments do not bother to revive issues which are drastically low on priority. Otherwise why on one hand we condemn 'Jallikattu' race and other Bull/ Buffalo fights and yet we do not raise a word of objection or protest when the show: PRO BULL RIDERS is aired on Zee Cafe every Sunday night at 12am and then repeated throughout the week. Would not the organisers of Bull/ Buffalo fights in India or others get ideas to start something of that sort back here as well. Nip it on the bud my friends if anything wrong is in the process before it snowballs into something so big that all we can do is cry. I have myself documented and inspected many zoos in India. from burning the nose of a wolf with a cigarette butt, to feeding liquor to rhesus macaques, I have documented them all and also got the offenders punished. Now, in a society which already full tummy with weird ideas of so called 'FUN' while visiting a zoo, you have a commercial TVC to add fuel to fire. Devika, since you have defended the TVC, will you also go to say that you find nothing objectionable to someone from the public feeding a wild scheduled animal in the zoo? For God`s sake advertisements are huge money spinners which are created by a team of professional creative artistes and now any Tom, Dick and Harry. They own a lot of 'Corporate Social Responsibility'. The understand the law. They understand the repercussions. They know very well that even if their advertisement is removed , they will get much much more free publicity when the advertisement will be repeatedly telecast on news televisions. As MMS it will get circulated. It will be the talk of town. Children will discuss about it in schools and the next time they go to a Zoo an alligator or the crocodile will quite naturally remind them of the stunt. Children are amazing. They much more intelligent to pick up things than we feel. And advertisers know that very well. They have very smartly developed this advertisement, and they need to be punished. In the past even film makers from Bollywood have had to appeal to the Children. Rakesh Roshan who made 'Krish' had to ask children not to attempt to duplicate the stunts performed by the superhero a Superman like character played by actor Hritick Roshan. Some boys also had lost their lives in trying to do so alike 'Shaktimaan'. Lastly I can only recall your own words which I found on your website, very correctly put though, and I quote: " Please remember, for each cat we save or rehome, literally hundreds go homeless, are victims of cruelty, or simply die of starvation or unattended health problems . Let's please work together to change those figures. " Link: http://planet-lynx.net/ctude.htm Let us please work together. Regards, Azam On 8/20/07, devika khazvini <copycatt wrote: Asian Animal Protection NetworkSorry to say this, but really not a single toffee/chocolate/mint ad is supposed to remotely be taken seriously; they are figurative and very spoofy and I honestly do not think this will lead to anyone feeding toffees to crocs in the zoo. I do respect your concern but the new advertising idiom for such products in India is extreme exaggeration, so I wouldn't worry, however tacky and stupid the creative platform. In fact (I have been in advertising for 25 years) I am quite certain that these ads perform no more than a recall-purpose, and have little to do with how the product is used. Many youth products are presented in absolutely wild and unreal scenarios in tv commercials. Devika The Cattitude Trust Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 Many thanks Pablo, I will definitely add my mite. Between us, i find most tv commercials asisine and have spent 26 years trying to write ads which are socially resonsible, i have refused to do sexist ads, and categorically refused to work with any project which shows animals badly. I have even included using stray dogs and kittens in my film scripts and ads, and am really proud of my latest achievement which was to make a film director include a scene in which the heroine is seen feeding street dogs...the film is due to be out soon and however small the impact of the scene, i believe it is one more step for our animals! Devika - Pablo devika khazvini Cc: aapn Tuesday, August 21, 2007 2:28 PM Re: Digest Number 2596 Dear Devika, That has already been done... What would be appreciated is that more people understand that we are standing admist tons of explosives....a simple otherwise harmless act of eating with a fork and knife therein can spark a catastrophy. So we need people to act like check points for almost everything, almost everywhere (unfortunately even for an otherwise silly thing as an ad). And this happens to be just ONE of the reasons for that sort of an inappropriate behaviour by a section of the ignorant society. Find below the contact details of the Sec General of ASCI. Gualbert I. Pereira, Secretary General ASCI, 219 Bombay Market, 78 Tardeo Road, Mumbai 400 034 Tel: 23521066. Fax: 23516863 e-mail: asci Thanks, Pablo. On 8/21/07, devika khazvini <copycatt > wrote: Dear Pablo, If you sincerely feel that it is ads that are responsible for such behaviour, I strongly recommend you write to the papers or even the marketing managers of the client company and the ad agency in question with your objections. If those who agreed with you did the same, it would have an impact on future ads I am sure. regards, Devika - Pablo devika khazvini Tuesday, August 21, 2007 10:24 AM Re: Digest Number 2596 Be it an ab-vibrator which claims to reduce your waist line by over an inch in an hour or driving down a cliff after consuming a carbonated drink, the very concept of advertisement apart from publicizing a product, targets gullible consumers who many a times blindly believe what is aired. 70% of these advertisements (be it products/ programmes) target the younger audience 5-15years who many times leap out of the building believing a 'Shaktiman' or 'Spiderman' would save them or bring down the roof in a shopping mall to get a packet of chocolate drink which has a 'superfast' car as a freebee. And just a couple of weeks ago did I circulate snapshots and videos of children feeding choclates and potato wafers to the deer and bear (as I had seen) at the Bannergatta National Park in Bangalore (issue already escalated to the Director of the park). So its not just about being tacky and stupid; I personally feel ad makers need to be more responsible in their creations. Not just that; since our area of focus is predominently animals and wildlife, and one visit to a zoo/ national park will convince anyone that not only such ads need to be recalled IMMEDIATELY, ad-makers need to understand the consequences of their ads. Thanks, Pablo. On 8/20/07, devika khazvini <copycatt > wrote: Asian Animal Protection NetworkSorry to say this, but really not a single toffee/chocolate/mint ad is supposed to remotely be taken seriously; they are figurative and very spoofy and I honestly do not think this will lead to anyone feeding toffees to crocs in the zoo. I do respect your concern but the new advertising idiom for such products in India is extreme exaggeration, so I wouldn't worry, however tacky and stupid the creative platform. In fact (I have been in advertising for 25 years) I am quite certain that these ads perform no more than a recall-purpose, and have little to do with how the product is used. Many youth products are presented in absolutely wild and unreal scenarios in tv commercials. Devika The Cattitude Trust Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 21, 2007 Report Share Posted August 21, 2007 <* But i have yet to meet someone who takes such ads seriously > CHILDREN, THEY TAKE IT SERIOUSLY IF NOT ADULTS. HERE ARE SOME EXAMPLES WHERE THE VISUAL MEDIUM HAS BEEN DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE LOSS OF INNOCENT LIVES. I HAVE TRIED TO JUST GIVE YOU TWO IMPORTANT LINKS, A GOOGLE WOUOLD BRING OUT HUNDREDS OF OTHER SIMILAR REALITIES IN OUR SOCIETY WHICH ARE SOME WAY OR THE OTHER LINKED TO MEDIA INFLUENCES. AZAM. 1. *Children die worldwide after seeing Saddam hang DUBAI: Seven children are reported to have died worldwide after seeing video footage of the execution of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, many in " play " hangings that ended in tragedy. Link: http://www.thenews.com.pk/update_detail.asp?id=15802 2. *Media violence: Fact and fiction* " Children represent the most vulnerable TV audience segment, given their youth and inexperience?Our findings indicate that media influences every aspect of children's lives…Their hopes and aspirations for the future, their attitudes to relationships ?familial, parental, romantic, sexual, etc, are all inextricably linked with what they see, hear and learn from TV. " ('A Child Centered Module', Viewer's Voices, Occasional Publication, February 2003.) *Link: http://www.infochangeindia.org/analysis189.jsp * On 8/21/07, devika khazvini <copycatt wrote: > > *Dear Azam,* > *I was not aware that i was " defending " anything.* > *Merely explaining a fact of life. If you are launching a campaign against > irresponsible advertising, i am happy to support it.* > *There is no call for people to label each other, i work round the clock > for animals. But i have yet to meet someone who takes such ads seriously and > that is all i was telling you, NOT that i support them. Perhaps my > communication was unclear, for which i must apologise!!* > ** > *devika* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.