I know you're joking about your age, but the sponsor of "The Filntstones" was 
Winston, not Kools.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81SMyZMoFL8 
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81SMyZMoFL8>

(I have no idea what's up with the aspect ratio on this one, but it does 
include the original closing credits, showing a flashing Winston billboard on 
the road into Bedrock.)


> On Mar 8, 2021, at 11:18 AM, Kevin M. <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 11:07 AM Melissa P <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> Apologies for the spotty input -- because grad school was decades ago.
> 
> That said, if I remember correctly, a semester class was split into two 
> parts, one of them, the economics of advertising.
> 
> Around the time that I was in school, the Federal Trade Commission was just 
> beginning to lift bans in certain industries that had previously been 
> prohibited from advertising on television.  I remember long discussions in 
> class about those industries and even wrote a term paper on one of them -- 
> eyeglass advertising.  The others I remember are the funeral industry, 
> lawyers, and -- (and non-OTC) pharmaceuticals.  
> 
> The theory:  more advertising = more competition = lower prices (and more and 
> better information) for consumers.
> 
> By now, I'm sure there's a ton of data and conclusions about how effective 
> lifting the bans has been.  Benefits outweigh costs?  Prices?  I haven't a 
> clue because I haven't looked at the papers/studies.  One effect is most 
> certainly the case:  advertising by the legal profession has made it possible 
> for an oversupply of lawyers to find employment.
> 
> Pharmaceuticals?  Lower prices?  Better health?  Better informed consumers?  
> I don't know, but the literature is undoubtedly out there.  
> 
> Just thought I'd post because it seems that a lot of people don't remember a 
> time when morticians, optometrists, lawyers, and drug companies didn't 
> advertise on TV.
> 
> I’m just old enough to remember Fred and Barney pausing from their antics in 
> Bedrock to smoke some smooth, refreshing Kool cigarettes. 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 10:50 AM Adam Bowie <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> I know of at least two people who stayed up until 2am to watch it live on 
> some kind of dodgy stream somewhere. And yes, there were a lot of comments on 
> the volume of advertising the interview had. I don't know if it was more than 
> the usual 19-20 mins per hour, but that is higher than we get in the UK where 
> we were, until recently, regulated by the EU and still have limits on the 
> number of breaks (two mid-breaks in a one hour show, one break in a 
> half-hour), and the number of ads.
> 
> But literally every person I talk to who's been to the US for vacation or 
> business will mention the pharmaceutical ads. It's worth noting that this has 
> been (at least until very recently - I believe Canada might now allow them) 
> an almost uniquely American thing. In the UK and EU, you only see drug 
> adverts for over the counter drugs. There's no "Ask your doctor" advertising. 
> There's also much hilarity at the nature of the ads - 30 seconds of benefits/ 
> 30 seconds of hideous side effects. I believe that this type of advertising 
> was only also legal in New Zealand. So yes - it's about as strange to us as 
> seeing cigarette advertising on TV.
> 
> Of course, European health services are very different. In the UK, most 
> people are treated under the NHS and you basically don't get a choice about 
> drug treatment. Not every drug is even available - there are committees that 
> determine which drugs the NHS will make available. (So  yes, really expensive 
> cancer drugs sometimes aren't available). And while some do have private 
> healthcare, it probably doesn't really allow for the kind of drug-picking 
> these ads are hypothesised on. Private healthcare is really to make sure you 
> don't have to wait for surgeries etc. It's probably not going to cover you 
> for an expensive cocktail of drugs otherwise unavailable on the NHS.
> 
> The interview is airing in the UK tonight on ITV, although obviously it has 
> already been fully gutted by all the news programmes this morning. Personally 
> I'm getting more - small r- republican as the days go by. The Royal Family 
> needs to radically modernise or ship out.
> 
> 
> Adam
> 
> On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 3:16 PM PGage <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> I am not in the target demo to watch an interview of Oprah interviewing 
> “Royals” (though the headline that they allege that someone at the palace was 
> worried their kids skin would be too dark sounds about right).
> 
> I did find this Twitter thread interesting, in which Brits who were able to 
> watch the American broadcast of the interview are obsessed with how many 
> commercials Americans are exposed to for drugs. It is a reminder that 
> healthcare does not have to be a business. Would be nice to put more 
> restrictions again on direct-to-consumer advertising in the US.
> 
> Also, I thought Oprah had a relationship with ABC, but it looks like this 
> interview was in CBS?
> 
> https://twitter.com/ayeshaasiddiqi/status/1368901637604007939?s=21 
> <https://twitter.com/ayeshaasiddiqi/status/1368901637604007939?s=21>-- 
> Sent from Gmail Mobile
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "TVorNotTV" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkYLU_ug38DOpU4%2B55BaNC_aFODog6AcUz3fqc-BC_B9ZnQ%40mail.gmail.com
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKGtkYLU_ug38DOpU4%2B55BaNC_aFODog6AcUz3fqc-BC_B9ZnQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "TVorNotTV" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAD_sJGDr4hLEEa87ma1bhK6%3Dsy5F_ZeO9G0M_oG36oJ7V8FZhw%40mail.gmail.com
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAD_sJGDr4hLEEa87ma1bhK6%3Dsy5F_ZeO9G0M_oG36oJ7V8FZhw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "TVorNotTV" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CA%2B_fQPw-5ONQuS66DDs-EN3qV43zMJ%3DtXXLmwny1M63fNahpTQ%40mail.gmail.com
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CA%2B_fQPw-5ONQuS66DDs-EN3qV43zMJ%3DtXXLmwny1M63fNahpTQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.
> -- 
> Kevin M. (RPCV)
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "TVorNotTV" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKgmY4Dfz2MuT_LpxrYzwrWQULyBA9gNRYCrh4mXpoXwO6amzA%40mail.gmail.com
>  
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKgmY4Dfz2MuT_LpxrYzwrWQULyBA9gNRYCrh4mXpoXwO6amzA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"TVorNotTV" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/EA419582-6E1B-4560-8076-FD1EB656AE0C%40ellwanger.tv.

Reply via email to