On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 6:16 PM Stan S <sta...@gmail.com> wrote: > Someone please send the Brits the Joe Namath Medicare Advantage ads :)
Oh wow. Just watched a couple of YouTube. Another good thing about our advertising rules is that you can't have reams of text that's too small to be legible, and on screen too briefly to read. I also don't think you can say one thing, and then "clarify" it with some tiny footnotes. Our advertising isn't perfect. Gambling ads are completely legal here, and frankly endemic. I suspect that they'll be banned in due course since everyone has discovered how normalising they've made gambling. The social costs of the addiction - which can start at very young ages - is high. (And let's face it, computer game loot boxes are also gambling.) No doubt as gambling legislation continues to be weakened in the US, you'll see it on your TVs too. In the meantime, look at the shirts of around half the Premier League football teams to see gambling ads, many of which are aimed at Chinese consumers, somewhere else that gambling ads are banned. Mind you, in the UK political TV (and radio) ads are banned. Imagine that! On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 7:07 PM Melissa P <takingupspace...@gmail.com> wrote: > ... > > 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. > I'm always interested who has paid for such studies :-) We don't get a lot of legal advertising in the UK. I don't believe it's massively controlled, and when there was a big equivalent of class action suits against banks which entitled many to some refunded payments, there were lots of ads. It's just not a category. Although UK TV advertising is very "national" rather than local. But you don't get billboards, bus posters or any of the other kinds of ads I see when I visit the US. Adam > On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 7:41 PM Kevin M. <drunkbastar...@gmail.com> wrote: > Dude, why you gotta fact-check me? > > Though in my head, it was Kools they were smoking. Must’ve been thing of a > different pair of cartoon characters... maybe Tom & Jerry were breathing in > menthols? Roadrunner and Coyote pausing to sing the praises of filters? > > On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 11:25 AM Jim Ellwanger <train...@ellwanger.tv> > wrote: > >> 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 >> >> (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. <drunkbastar...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 8, 2021 at 11:07 AM Melissa P <takingupspace...@gmail.com> >> 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 <a...@adambowie.co.uk> 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 <pga...@gmail.com> 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 >>>>> -- >>>>> 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 tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> 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 tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>> 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 tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> 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 tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> >> 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 tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/EA419582-6E1B-4560-8076-FD1EB656AE0C%40ellwanger.tv >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/EA419582-6E1B-4560-8076-FD1EB656AE0C%40ellwanger.tv?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 tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKgmY4CgUjaRkaXHHe7uBbud4UFaFCYo0zYLNcqf3Qr4EuN8Ag%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAKgmY4CgUjaRkaXHHe7uBbud4UFaFCYo0zYLNcqf3Qr4EuN8Ag%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 tvornottv+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tvornottv/CAD_sJGAdrBuq2YQAhO6rU7qM%3D3wGC4ES-%2Bs0XPhsMqoKmW-W8Q%40mail.gmail.com.
