egosoft.com

Iceland* were going to run the advert below for their Christmas campaign but have not be allowed to do so.

I personally believe that its message is one that very needs to be heard and I would encourage you all to watch it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdpspllWI2o

There is a nascent campaign afoot on social media to try and get it the most views of any Christmas advert ever. . . . this is the correct response to this particular example of censorship and I hope it succeeds.

*Edit: Disambiguation for the non-British people here "Iceland" is a supermarket chain. . . . . in addition to being a country.

Slick advertising from Iceland,, loads of free advertising all based around a pledge..not for succeeding.
To use something so emotive for a Christmas ad suggests brilliance or naivety ... Not disputing that more should be done to protect endangered species but I see promotion for one advertising executive.
I have watched the advert and it is excellent in bringing awareness to Western consumers if only for a short while, regretfully.

It is absolutely valid to be cynical about a commercial entity using their support for a good cause as advertising.
However, the only forces powerful enough to be effective in this particular context are economic ones . . . supply and demand.
Reducing demand by forcing a change in consumer behaviour is the only way forward, and the only entities with the power, money and motivation to do that are companies like Iceland.
Yes of course they will also play it to gain a commercial advantage, but so be it, it would be nice if capitalism could be a force for good for a change!

Bishop149 wrote: ↑

Fri, 9. Nov 18, 13:30

Iceland* were going to run the advert below for their Christmas campaign but have not be allowed to do so.

I personally believe that its message is one that very needs to be heard and I would encourage you all to watch it:..

It was a nice commercial, but a bit dark...

"WTF are you doing in my bedroom, breaking my stuff and disturbing the peace?"

"Oh, you cut down my rain forest, so I have no place else to go."

"WHAT? We'll not have any immigrants or refugees in THIS bedroom! I'm going to make sure you stay put where you belong by getting rid of all the palm oil we use! That will keep the foreigners out of my bedroom!"



PS - Why the heck did they name a supermarket/grocery store chain "Iceland?" WTF is that all about? Didn't they know the name was already taken? Don't tell me it's named after the ice used to preserved frozen foods, either. That'd be like naming a grocery store "Canada" because it has cans in it...

Morkonan wrote: ↑

Fri, 9. Nov 18, 22:51

PS - Why the heck did they name a supermarket/grocery store chain "Iceland?" WTF is that all about?

It's called that because it used to pretty much only sell frozen food. It's diversified a bit in recent years, but frozen stuff is still a mainstay. And yes, Iceland the country doesn't like that Iceland the supermarket has a trademark on their name:

https://icelandmag.is/article/no-soluti ... upermarket

Morkonan wrote: ↑

Fri, 9. Nov 18, 22:51

It was a nice commercial, but a bit dark...

"WTF are you doing in my bedroom, breaking my stuff and disturbing the peace?"

"Oh, you cut down my rain forest, so I have no place else to go."

That's because it wasn't originally a commercial advert - it was a film produced by/for Greenpeace. All Iceland have done is stick a couple of PowerPoint slides at the end of it.

That's largely the problem they have; all political advertising is against regulations in the UK and they haven't changed it enough to make it non-political. 'Political' in this sense means seeking a change to local or national government (including foreign government) policy, and I think there are a couple of parts of the voiceover that do that. If they tweak the voiceover to remove that, and make it just about what we can do in our own lives (as customers or the company), then I'm sure it will be allowed to be broadcast. Whether they do that, or whether they're happy with the impact and have stopped caring already, remains to be seen.

Further reading from the ASA: https://www.asa.org.uk/type/broadcast/c ... on/07.html

pjknibbs wrote: ↑

Sat, 10. Nov 18, 05:53

Morkonan wrote: ↑

Fri, 9. Nov 18, 22:51

PS - Why the heck did they name a supermarket/grocery store chain "Iceland?" WTF is that all about?

It's called that because it used to pretty much only sell frozen food. It's diversified a bit in recent years, but frozen stuff is still a mainstay. And yes, Iceland the country doesn't like that Iceland the supermarket has a trademark on their name:

https://icelandmag.is/article/no-soluti ... upermarket

...

lolz

I think the situation is ridiculous... They're applying their trademark/copyright far too broadly. For instance, the Coca-Cola Company does not like people calling all soda beverages "coke." It's a popular term for such beverages in the Southeastern US. "I'll have a coke" is often a different request than "I'll have a Coke." Weird, but true. So, why doesn't Coca-Cola embrace people's cultural enthusiasm? Because they don't want to lose their trademark/copyright to common parlance and challenge. They surely wouldn't, probably... But, lawyers don't like "probablies."

Rapier wrote: ↑

Sat, 10. Nov 18, 12:20

That's because it wasn't originally a commercial advert - it was a film produced by/for Greenpeace. All Iceland have done is stick a couple of PowerPoint slides at the end of it.

That's largely the problem they have; all political advertising is against regulations in the UK and they haven't changed it enough to make it non-political. 'Political' in this sense means seeking a change to local or national government (including foreign government) policy, and I think there are a couple of parts of the voiceover that do that. If they tweak the voiceover to remove that, and make it just about what we can do in our own lives (as customers or the company), then I'm sure it will be allowed to be broadcast. Whether they do that, or whether they're happy with the impact and have stopped caring already, remains to be seen.

Further reading from the ASA: https://www.asa.org.uk/type/broadcast/c ... on/07.html

Interesting. I saw it more as a "we are doing something" sort of commercial/propaganda ad than a political "call to action." I'll have to watch it again, but if there is anything "political" in it, I'm sure they could just change a few words to make it fit within regulation. (Though, being a 'Murican, you can understand my discomfiture when someone says that there are laws against political ads. How do television stations stay in business, otherwise? )