Latest Way They Influence Us (Tell Us. ) All How To Think

[HumbleNarrator 286]

Look into "nudge unit."

[The_DADDY 3,482]

Just now, HumbleNarrator said:

Look into "nudge unit."

Ah, you mean the conspiracy theory that never was? 🤔

[Chekhov 488]

2 hours ago, Mister M said:

I don't know much about the organisation however if it is encouraging ethical advertising

It would seem to me that the boundary difference between "ethical advertising" and encouraging a Woke view of the world is a fine one.

 

2 hours ago, Mister M said:

I'm surprised you haven't picked up on the fact that it appears to be members of the Tory Party only who are condemning this organisation.

It's totally to be expected. Leftie authoritarians love all this Woke cobblers, they lap it up. Generally Tories would be more likely to be cynical about it.

 

2 hours ago, Mister M said:

I don't regard "right to freedom from harm" as 'woke',

I've already answered that point :

 

"right to freedom from harm"

 

What kid of cobblers is that ?

I read their manifesto and it sounded like politically correct conditioning, nothing to do with "freedom from harm".

However, whenever I read stuff like "freedom from harm" it alarms me because is often a cover for "we think people are incapable of looking after themselves, so we will do it for them", like they tried to do during Covid  (censored).

Forget stuff like personal freedom and personal responsibility, that's old hat...

Edited August 23, 2023 by Chekhov

[Chekhov 488]

2 hours ago, Mister M said:

 Chekhov said:
It comes down to how you define "bullying". And, as I said, I would be flabbergasted if Patel (or Dominic Raab for that matter) was guilty of what I would consider bullying.

 

Very easy to answer that one. Sir Alex Allan used the High Court's definition as interpreted by their analysis of the Ministerial Code.

You did complain endlessly about having to wear a paper mask during the pandemic.

No, you are just giving their view, the prevalent view in a cotton wool world full of over sensitive people.

 

>>You did complain endlessly about having to wear a paper mask during the pandemic.<<

 

I think you are comparing two totally different things.

 

People being upset what others might say to them v people being forced to do something unnatural which they really do not want to do and which they never have been forced to do before, AND, I may add, for which the evidence for its efficacy was dubious to put it mildly.

 

2 hours ago, trastrick said:

When you run a society with strict rules based on subjective definitions of "harm", "hate", "bullying", and 'greater good". you are opening the door to charlatans who will define those terms, in any way they please! They will eventually deem them selves perpetual power, for the "greater good".

The definition of totalitarianism from Russia, Middle East to China and North Korea!

And why so called 'enlightened" populations, despite a thousand years of civilization can sink to economic and political chaos, and, of course the endless wars, that inevitably follow!

Excellent post.

Edited August 23, 2023 by Chekhov

[Chekhov 488]

2 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

   Defending Rupert Murdoch!

Yet another attempt by Murdoch, his ruthless multi $billion businesses and his paid Tory help to avoid responsibility and a hit on profits. It must really worry Republicans and Tories that their biggest media supporter would want avoid being responsible  for the content of 'NewsCorp'. The Courts, Licencing and Regulatory bodies in the UK already have a role in requiring standards to be upheld, but are not keeping up with 'digital' media.

   Perusing the CAN manifestos and aims reveals the following.

• Anti Ad-Fraud:The digital advertising ecosystem should be accountable for minimising ad-fraud across trading relationships.
• Diversity: Ad agencies should ensure that content is as diverse as the society it serves, from research to strategy to media placement.
• Informed consent:People should be seen as active participants in, and controllers of, their own online experience.
• Hate speech: Advertisers should take action to make hate unprofitable by eradicating it from their media spendand supporting media that plays a positive role.
• Children’s Wellbeing: Advertising to children should be age appropriate, promote positive messaging and avoid glamorising negative behaviour.
• Mis/Disinformation: Advertisers must take the responsibility to ensure they don’t fund mis/disinformation, click-bait and any intentionally misleading content.
• Sustainability: The content advertisers create, and the processes by which they are created, should be sustainable and responsibly considered, avoiding creating or funding climate crisis misinformation.

   The media industry is in constant confrontation between maintaining its 'freedoms' and a level of  responsibility demanded by the public. Murdoch has hundreds of  $millions to combat incursions into his empire and freedoms of the press will be way down in his priorities.

>>Informed consent : People should be seen as active participants in, and controllers of, their own online experience.<<

 

What does that even mean..... It sounds like a load of meaningless American manager speak, but if it means being asked if they want cookies that requirement has been totally counter productive.

 

>>Mis/Disinformation: Advertisers must take the responsibility to ensure they don’t fund mis/disinformation, click-bait and any intentionally misleading content.<<

 

Who decides what is dis information ? I seem to remember a load of "dis information was being censored during Covid, and it turned out to be true, or at least more accurate than some of the cobblers they were foisting on us all (censored).

 

>>Sustainability: The content advertisers create, and the processes by which they are created, should be sustainable and responsibly considered, avoiding creating or funding climate crisis misinformation.<<

 

Utter utter meaningless cobblers.

Are they going to refuse to accept adverts from airlines or package holiday companies ?

climate crisis misinformation ? Don't even get me started on that, what you, and they, mean is censorship.

 

>>Hate speech: Advertisers should take action to make hate unprofitable by eradicating it from their media spendand supporting media that plays a positive role.<<

 

What the hell is "hate speech" anyway and who gets to define it ?

Personally I cannot remember reading any anywhere.

Some Woke extremists think people saying a woman cannot become a man is "hate speech".

It's UTTER cobblers.

[Mister M 1,632]

51 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

It would seem to me that the boundary difference between "ethical advertising" and encouraging a Woke view of the world is a fine one.

So explain it then.

Quote

 

It's totally to be expected. Leftie authoritarians love all this Woke cobblers, they lap it up. Generally Tories would be more likely to be cynical about it.

Yes but your definition of woke will be different to others. 

And you missed the point. The reason why 46 Tory MPs are complaining about an organisation promoting 'ethical advertising' is that it is a direct threat to the existence of GBNews and right wing newspapers which pump out pro Tory propaganda.

If companies don't want to be associated with right wing propaganda then they shouldn't be forced to.

It's a free market, and they shouldn't be backing lame duck industries that don't change with the times.

 

40 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

No, you are just giving their view, the prevalent view in a cotton wool world full of over sensitive people.

No I'm giving the legal, authoritative view as informed by law. As opposed to the uninformed view.

Quote

 

>>You did complain endlessly about having to wear a paper mask during the pandemic.<<

 

I think you are comparing two totally different things.

 

People being upset what others might say to them v people being forced to do something unnatural which they really do not want to do and which they never have been forced to do before, AND, I may add, for which the evidence for its efficacy was dubious to put it mildly.

 

 

This isn't about what is said, but what is done -e.g. advertising.

And of course you would want to make that distinction,  because while you brand the C.A.N as over sensitive, you yourself are very over sensitive when it comes to your experience, and how everyone should respect your views.

Sorry, there's millions of other people whose views matter, not just yours. Stop being so selfish.

30 minutes ago, Chekhov said:

>>Informed consent : People should be seen as active participants in, and controllers of, their own online experience.<<

 

What does that even mean..... It sounds like a load of meaningless American manager speak, but if it means being asked if they want cookies that requirement has been totally counter productive.

 

>>Mis/Disinformation: Advertisers must take the responsibility to ensure they don’t fund mis/disinformation, click-bait and any intentionally misleading content.<<

 

Who decides what is dis information ? I seem to remember a load of "dis information was being censored during Covid, and it turned out to be true, or at least more accurate than some of the cobblers they were foisting on us all (censored).

Ofcom for one. The ASA for another.

Quote

>>Hate speech: Advertisers should take action to make hate unprofitable by eradicating it from their media spendand supporting media that plays a positive role.<<

 

What the hell is "hate speech" anyway and who gets to define it ?

Personally I cannot remember reading any anywhere.

Some Woke extremists think people saying a woman cannot become a man is "hate speech".

It's UTTER cobblers.

Parliament has laid out very clearly what hate speech is.

Edited August 23, 2023 by Mister M

[Al Bundy 1,577]

4 minutes ago, Mister M said:

If companies don't want to be associated with right wing propaganda then they shouldn't be forced to.

It's a free market, and they shouldn't be backing lame duck industries that don't change with the times.

Lame duck industries?

 

 

[Mister M 1,632]

7 minutes ago, Al Bundy said:

Lame duck industries?

 

 

That was a term used by Thatcherites in the 1980s for not giving preferential treatment or government contracts to industries that were defined as un profitable.

Edited August 23, 2023 by Mister M

[Chekhov 488]

6 hours ago, Mister M said:

“This means that hateful content

 

5 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

Hate speech: Advertisers should take action to make hate unprofitable by eradicating it from their media spendand supporting media that plays a positive role.

Could someone please give me an example of so called "hate speech" ?

Even more relevantly, an example from The Sun, The Express, or The Mail

Edited August 23, 2023 by Chekhov

[Chekhov 488]

2 hours ago, Mister M said:

>>Chekhov said:
No, you are just giving their view [of what constitutes "bullying"], the prevalent view in a cotton wool world full of over sensitive people.<<

 

No I'm giving the legal, authoritative view as informed by law. As opposed to the uninformed view.

Like what constitutes "assault" (where nobody is actually hurt) ?

How can there possibly be a legal definition of something subjective like "bullying" ?

Or are you one of those who thinks the definition of  "bullying" (like the definition of "assault") should be up to the "victim" ?

It's cobblers, we live in a pathetic "victims" world.

People should man up.

2 hours ago, Mister M said:

>>Chekhov said:
It would seem to me that the boundary difference between "ethical advertising" and encouraging a Woke view of the world is a fine one.<<

 

So explain it then.

I did, there is no difference.

Edited August 23, 2023 by Chekhov

[Mkapaka 220]

7 hours ago, Chekhov said:

It just gets worse and worse.

 

I'd never heard of the Conscious Advertising Network before I read an article in The Times but its agenda is typical of way modern  woke society spreads its ideas about what should be "normal" and "acceptable".

It's co-founders were members of "Stop Funding Hate", a left wing campaign group, with a Motherhood and Apple pie name. But, of course hate to an over sensitive Woke-ist is not what most people would call "hate" anyway.

 

Amongst its political manifestos are the usual politically correct infatuations, e.g.  "Ad agencies should ensure that content is as diverse as the society it serves, from research to strategy to media placement" (though in actual fact what that usually means is for content to have a greater proportion of gay people, trans people and non-white people than the "society it serves").

 

And "Advertisers must take the responsibility to ensure they don’t fund mis/disinformation, click-bait and any intentionally misleading content." Again sounds reasonable, but hold on.... Who decides what is "disinformation" ? And, for example, would that include lockdown sceptics, who, we now know, were actually right in much of what they said at the time....

 

The group has campaigned to stop brands advertising in The Daily Mail, The Sun and the Mail, and GB News.

 

 It's deeply worrying, and I would be surprised if most people realised just how society is being manipulated in a thoroughly insidious manner.

You are definitely anxious and seeking protection.

 

why don’t you be like the rest of society and chill out a bit?

[Chekhov 488]

2 hours ago, Mister M said:

right wing propaganda

Sorry ? ! ?

So if GB News is "right wing propaganda, what is the Beeb ? And, judging by how they covered Covid (censored) most of the rest of the MSM ?