 Poster: A snowHead
|
An email promotion of ski helmets, sent on the morning that actress Natasha Richardson died and featuring her image next to a news report, has been banned by the Advertising Standards Authority.
The ASA stated that the advert breached three rules concerning taste and decency.
This report from Telegraph.co.uk.
| Quote: |
Skiwear4less' parent company The Ski and Outdoor Warehouse Ltd told the ASA it had intended to use Miss Richardson's death to highlight how the accident might not have happened had she been wearing a helmet.
The firm said the email was an attempt to stop such accidents happening in future, adding it was "factually written and handled with particular care". |
Have you done business with (bought a helmet from?) skiwear4less?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Their marketing department has lost the plot
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
What a waste of public money. The best way to take offence is not to buy the product.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
I can't imagine you'd express that point of view to Natasha Richardson's family, without adopting anonymity.
By all accounts the mailshot was exceptionally offensive, exploiting a particularly traumatic death and the identity of the victim to sell helmets.
It's hardly enough to say "don't buy the product". The offence was caused by the sight of the advert, which should clearly never have gone out. It seems right and proper that we should have a public authority to say as much.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
David Goldsmith, I would tell her family that I find the advert offensive, which I do, but I would also tell them, if I were asked, that I wouldn't be complaining to the government.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think it's a fair task for the Advertising Standards Authority. From time to time it's useful for the authority to lay down standards/criteria of acceptability. It's a very public rap over the knuckles - much better than a few complete unknown and anonymous people who weren't going to buy anything from that Company anyway, telling each other that they disapprove.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The day I get worked up over an advert is the day I realize I have no hobbies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
My main hobby is getting worked up over adverts... what should i do? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The owner of Skiwear4worse, and chalet holiday owner in Morzine, will be laughing his head off (scuse pun) at all this free publicity/notoriety. I think he enjoys this kind of game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
I thought that I'd cornered the market in "Offensive" and "distasteful" 
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
Scarpa,
Nope, still a bit of work to do boss 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scarpa, I think there are a few hundred MP ahead of you!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Jade Goody dies of cervical cancer. Cue masses of publicity for smear tests. Thousands of young women seek tests, and many lives are saved. Everyone applauds, and rightly so.
Natasha Richardson dies of a head injury incurred while skiing. Cue masses of publicity for helmets. Thousands of skiers begin wearing helmets and many lives are saved. Everyone applauds... oh, wait...
A good thing doesn't become a bad thing just because someone makes a profit. Even cervical smear nurses get paid, after all. I, for one, applaud the increasing adoption of a cheap and convenient technology that reduces the incidence of injury and death amongst skiers.
The ASA got it wrong this time. But I suspect that DG would never agree because he firmly belives that helmets are a Bad Thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
Don't be ridiculous. Skiwear4less blatantly exploited the name and image of a person who had died the same day, without her family's consent.
I daresay you're expressing that view because it's attached to a fake name and therefore, essentially, you can say anything you like without any responsibility or accountability. That doesn't mean that the view isn't offensive to those who believe that people's families should be able to grieve without commercial vultures operating on the day of a death.
I think ASA were phenomenally understated in their ruling.
Is Jonny Jones your real name? Was that your bona fide opinion?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
Actually I think this whole thing is so sick that the helmet manufacturer(s) concerned might want to boycott this retailer for the way in which their products have been promoted. They have, after all, had their name dragged into this nasty affair.
Anyone know which helmets were involved?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Anybody care?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
er, David Goldsmith, i won't because i am not interested in the ad. and i haven't read the asa report to see if the manufacturer is mentioned because i'm not interested in reading anymore about a skiwear retailer prepared to behave in such a way.
i think you're the one who wants to do some name-dragging-through-mud but you're not prepared to be the one who releases the manufacturer details into the (snowheads) wild. once again. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| achilles wrote: |
| Anybody care? |
That's for you to answer. If Natasha Richardson had been your daughter/sister would you have cared if her photo and circumstances of her death had been exploited by a trader on the day of her death?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
David Goldsmith, I hadn't heard of Natasha Richardson before her death - and at a loss to understand the media coverage it caused. I would have no problem in one of my children's death being associated with a commercial promoting a relevant safety product - I think I would welcome it - and that the ASA was wrong in this case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| achilles wrote: |
David Goldsmith, I hadn't heard of Natasha Richardson before her death - and at a loss to understand the media coverage it caused.
|
I'm a little surprised at tha, but I suppose if you have no interest at all in the cinema, then there wouldn't be much reason to have heard of her.
| Quote: |
I would have no problem in one of my children's death being associated with a commercial promoting a relevant safety product - I think I would welcome it - and that the ASA was wrong in this case. |
You would welcome a commercial retailer of "safety" products advertising using your child's case within 24 hours of said child's death? You may believe you would welcome it, but if the circumstance actually arose (and I hope it doesn't), you might find you felt rather differently.
The ASA was absolutely right, even if there are some people around who wouldn't have been offended. I have no idea how many would, but I expect it would be quite a large proportion of the population.
It would be different if the image were used in a low key way, in a later campaign, once the initial grief and shock had a chance to die down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So, basically what we are saying is had skiwear4chumps contacted Natasha Richardsons' solicitor, paid thousands of dollars for the image rights, and then launched the campaign, everything would be OK?
I wonder how much the Government have paid for the numerous images they give us in their 'Health and Safety' campaigns - like the cancer sufferers or road accident victims. Maybe the NHS should offer PR agents instead of counselling?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Jonny Jones wrote: |
Jade Goody dies of cervical cancer. Cue masses of publicity for smear tests. Thousands of young women seek tests, and many lives are saved. Everyone applauds, and rightly so.
Natasha Richardson dies of a head injury incurred while skiing. Cue masses of publicity for helmets. Thousands of skiers begin wearing helmets and many lives are saved. Everyone applauds... oh, wait...
|
Almost certainly correct.
| Quote: |
... oh, wait...
A good thing doesn't become a bad thing just because someone makes a profit.
|
And nobody has suggested it might.
But specific advertising of retail products, taking advantage of that "masses of publicity for helmets" you talk of isn't a "good thing" which can be made into a "bad thing" because somebody makes a profit.
| Quote: |
Even cervical smear nurses get paid, after all. I, for one, applaud the increasing adoption of a cheap and convenient technology that reduces the incidence of injury and death amongst skiers.
|
I agree. But that has nothing to do with this thread.
| Quote: |
The ASA got it wrong this time. But I suspect that DG would never agree because he firmly belives that helmets are a Bad Thing. |
It is nothing to do with whether helmets are a good thomg or a bad thing.
The ASA got it right, because it was insensitive and offensive exploitation of a tragic event, while the grief of the family was still fresh, purely in order to sell more of a retail product.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
alex_heney, I have little interest in the cinema - I go perhaps two to three times a year. Even when I do go, I am disinterested as to who the actors' names are. Some names to get through even to me - Robin Williams, Daniel Craig, and Bill Nighy for example. But an awful lot do not register with me. I may well have seen NR - but been unaware who she was.
As to the rest of your comment - well my feelings concerning my children in such circumstances will hopefully remain hypothetical. But I do believe that it is a good thing if a death can be some benefit to humanity - and as a capitalist, I recognise that there often has to be a profit in it for someone. We'll have to agree to disagree over the ASA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Guvnor wrote: |
So, basically what we are saying is had skiwear4chumps contacted Natasha Richardsons' solicitor, paid thousands of dollars for the image rights, and then launched the campaign, everything would be OK?
|
Nope. I don't think anybody has said anything remotely similar to that.
The fact that the family were not contacted, and the image was used without permission does add to the offence, but it doesn't mean it would have been "OK" if the family had been contacted.
And if the family had given permission, then whether they would have been paid thousands of dollars or not would have been irrelevant.
| Quote: |
I wonder how much the Government have paid for the numerous images they give us in their 'Health and Safety' campaigns - like the cancer sufferers or road accident victims. Maybe the NHS should offer PR agents instead of counselling? |
Not onnly do I have no idea, but I also have no idea whatsoever why you think it might have any relevance.
They certainly will have obtained the permission of those whose images they use, or their families. But the amount paid has no relevance at all to whether it is offensive or not. And it is extremeley unlikely that the images would have been used within hours/days of the death.
And even then, there is a huge difference between a commnercial organisation specifically advertising the things it is selling based on such images, and a generic campaign by public health bodies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
One truly wonders whether the moral outrage shown here today is really about the alleged exploitation of Natasha Richardsons unfortunate death or rather more to do with being reminded of what they know is true but don't want to hear!
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| I daresay you're expressing that view because it's attached to a fake name and therefore, essentially, you can say anything you like without any responsibility or accountability... Is Jonny Jones your real name? Was that your bona fide opinion? |
Jonny Jones is my real name. But what makes me snigger is the thought that you, of all people, should think that the expression of an unpopular opinion is prima facie evidence that the poster is acting under a pseudonym. I have a suspicion that you might not be David Goldsmith after all...
Care to apologise and engage in some serious debate instead of name calling?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, I'd be pleased to meet you and apologise in person, Jonny. I'll bring my passport and you're welcome to bring photo ID too.
Obviously I mean it - I mistakenly assumed that your name wasn't genuine.
On the subject in question, it's only got something to do with helmets and the death of a real person because it is such an extreme example of exploitation of a real person's identity. Most people would be furious about the unauthorised use of their photo and personal story to promote anything at any time, in any circumstances, without their permission.
Clearly you're not in that camp.
Last edited by So if you're just off somewhere snowy come back and post a snow report of your own and we'll all love you very much  on Thu 14-05-09 10:02; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
Since the government is spending vastly more money than it has, economies will have to be found. Not spending money on protecting a few people from hurt feelings might be considered as part of the mix.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| Most people would be furious about the unauthorised use of their photo and personal story to promote anything at any time, in any circumstances, without their permission. |
How on earth do you know that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
| laundryman wrote: |
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| Most people would be furious about the unauthorised use of their photo and personal story to promote anything at any time, in any circumstances, without their permission. |
How on earth do you know that? |
I'll be delighted to give you a credible answer to that question if you'd care to meet me and Jonny, so that we can see if you can keep a straight face. Don't ask such ridiculous questions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
David Goldsmith, I have no intention of meeting an ignorant, obsessive bore. I'd happily have a drink or two with jonny though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
Set 'em up Jonny
I'll just have to sit at home, moping over a can of lager
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Regrettably, tragedies sometimes occur. But a society that fails to learn from history will never improve. I'm not too bothered whether someone makes money on the way through - I just want to see the next tragedy being avoided.
Journalists routinely make money out of tragedy. Reporters who risk their lives uncovering atrocities such as war crimes and genocide perform a vital public service, but they also earn a wedge of cash and further their careers. Does that diminish the importance of their work? Of course not.
I believe that selling helmets to skiers - and persuading them that helmet wearing is sensible, practical and cool - is an important public service. Who cares that the vendors make money? We all have to eat.
If, as seems likely, this advertisement and the subsequent furore reduces the number of orphans in the world, I applaud it - even if some people are offended. Death is offensive and, tragically, all the sympathy in the world won't restore Natasha Richardson to her family. Let's do all we can to help other families escape the same grief.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| Jonny Jones wrote: |
| ......I believe that selling helmets to skiers - and persuading them that helmet wearing is sensible, practical and cool - is an important public service. ...... |
I don't. But I can see that many do, and can see no harm in the original advertisement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, we'll have to agree to disagree.
To me it's like skiwear4less plastering a great big sticker on Natasha Richardson's coffin. It's probably the sickest thing I've encountered in 35+ years of observing the ski trade in the UK.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Goldsmith, if skiwear4less had used her image to promote designer handbags, I'd agree with you. But her image was relevant here, because they were selling a safety product that, if used, could reasonably have been expected to prevent her death.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
Seem to recall K2 running an obituary for Doug Coombs, and suspect that McConkey will have had his sponsors running similar obituary 'campaigns'.....am struggling to see the difference, other than the image rights were owned by the companies concerned....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guvnor, K2 named a ski after him... Can't see the "Natasha" helmet catching on though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
