Graphic SPCA ads

Cheryl wrote:
Yowie wrote:
snip
All these ads are said to work *extremely* well because they shock
people out of complancy. I can imagine the ASPCA ones do the same thing.

That sort of thing has the opposite effect on me - I have a contrary
streak a mile wide and any explicit or emotional appeal automatically
has me wondering what are the facts? They can't have any good data, or
they wouldn't be doing this stuff.

A wider problem is that as the shock value wears off, the material has
to get more and more extreme to have any effect at all, and sooner or
later the target audience just laughs at it, like my friends laughed at
the anti-smoking and anti-marijuana warnings lo those many years ago.

People eventually realize that not everyone who smokes dies of lung
cancer; not everyone who drinks and drives kills someone and not
everyone who uses illegal drugs ends up dead or in a mental institution
- and when they realize that the ads were not entirely correct, they
ignore the risks that do exist.

Well, there's no way of injecting basic intelligence into people who
lack it. I live in a senior retirement residence which has a
non-smoking policy. Smoking is allowed only in very limited outdoor
areas, and new residents are required to sign a document acknowledging
that they are aware of the policy and that smoking in their apartments
or in any of the facility's buildings is grounds for immediate eviction.
You still get people grousing that "no one can tell me where I can
smoke"! The real irony is that some of those smokers are in wheel
chairs with oxygen cylinders attached, and STILL have to light up with
the others (hopefully disconnecting their oxygen first).

On Dec 22, 4:57*pm, Jack Campin - bogus address
wrote:
the SPCA showed a vivid ad about what is done to animals for meat,
kitten and puppy mills etc, and me, being so totally sensitive,
I had nightmares all night.
Do they really think graphic ads like that will help their cause?
Graphic ads get people's attention and make them think.

Yup. *I've never smoked. *Any time I even thought about it, I remembered
a film we were shown in primary school in New Zealand when I was 9. *The
particular image I could never forget was a smoker with cancer having a
lobe of his lung removed - *splat* **wobble** as it landed in an enamel
kidney bowl. *(Maybe not everybody would react to that as intensely as
I did, but I'd had a lot of surgery and knew that if a kidney bowl got
anywhere near you there was a painful and bloody reason for it).

I don't think they use films like that in the UK (which is why I see so
many kids around here still smoking). *Stupid. *Smoking is something
people *ought* to be having nightmares about.

Did you have to watch the horrible, graphic Driver's Ed films? They
were
generally the aftermath of horrible car accidents, with close-up views
of various mangled bodies of (usually) teenagers.
It made us all slow down for about a week maybe. I don't think it left
a lasting effect on any of us. But then, teenagers think they're
invincible
anyway.
I don't remember films about the evils of smoking. But then, that was
back
when the cloud of smoke coming out of the teacher's lounge would choke
a horse.
Sherry
Sherry

Sherry wrote:

On Dec 22, 4:57?pm, Jack Campin - bogus address

Yup. ?I've never smoked. ?Any time I even thought about it, I remembered
a film we were shown in primary school in New Zealand when I was 9. ?The
particular image I could never forget was a smoker with cancer having a
lobe of his lung removed - *splat* **wobble** as it landed in an enamel
kidney bowl. ?(Maybe not everybody would react to that as intensely as
I did, but I'd had a lot of surgery and knew that if a kidney bowl got
anywhere near you there was a painful and bloody reason for it).

I don't think they use films like that in the UK (which is why I see so
many kids around here still smoking). ?Stupid. ?Smoking is something
people *ought* to be having nightmares about.

Did you have to watch the horrible, graphic Driver's Ed films? They
were
generally the aftermath of horrible car accidents, with close-up views
of various mangled bodies of (usually) teenagers.
It made us all slow down for about a week maybe. I don't think it left
a lasting effect on any of us. But then, teenagers think they're
invincible
anyway.
I don't remember films about the evils of smoking. But then, that was
back
when the cloud of smoke coming out of the teacher's lounge would choke
a horse.

I remember an anti-smoking movie from when I was in about 8th grade.
It was called "One in 20,000", which referred to the number of people
who survived, once diagnosed with lung cancer. Did I mention this was
in 1968? I would hope the survival rate has improved since then, but
even if so, I know it's a very hard cancer to beat.

Anyway, this movie had a graphic scene of lung surgery. Kids were leaving
the room right and left in order to avoid fainting and/or vomiting. I
just stared at the floor until that scene was over.

I also have a vague memory of a movie in driver's ed, but the main
thing I got out of that was that you shouldn't drive too *slowly*, because
someone will try to pass you and have a head-on collision with someone
coming the other way.

Right before the prom and graduation, my high school was treated to some
horrible movie about what happened to some kids who got drunk at the prom
and had a bloody accident.

I was a pretty well-behaved kid and didn't smoke, didn't do much drinking,
and didn't drive drunk in any case. I have no idea whether those films
played a role in that.

Joyce
--
There are 10 kinds of people in the world: those who understand binary
and those who don't.

wrote:
Sherry wrote:

On Dec 22, 4:57?pm, Jack Campin - bogus address

Yup. ?I've never smoked. ?Any time I even thought about it, I remembered
a film we were shown in primary school in New Zealand when I was 9. ?The
particular image I could never forget was a smoker with cancer having a
lobe of his lung removed - *splat* **wobble** as it landed in an enamel
kidney bowl. ?(Maybe not everybody would react to that as intensely as
I did, but I'd had a lot of surgery and knew that if a kidney bowl got
anywhere near you there was a painful and bloody reason for it).

I don't think they use films like that in the UK (which is why I see so
many kids around here still smoking). ?Stupid. ?Smoking is something
people *ought* to be having nightmares about.

Did you have to watch the horrible, graphic Driver's Ed films? They
were
generally the aftermath of horrible car accidents, with close-up views
of various mangled bodies of (usually) teenagers.
It made us all slow down for about a week maybe. I don't think it left
a lasting effect on any of us. But then, teenagers think they're
invincible
anyway.
I don't remember films about the evils of smoking. But then, that was
back
when the cloud of smoke coming out of the teacher's lounge would choke
a horse.

I remember an anti-smoking movie from when I was in about 8th grade.
It was called "One in 20,000", which referred to the number of people
who survived, once diagnosed with lung cancer. Did I mention this was
in 1968? I would hope the survival rate has improved since then, but
even if so, I know it's a very hard cancer to beat.

Anyway, this movie had a graphic scene of lung surgery. Kids were leaving
the room right and left in order to avoid fainting and/or vomiting. I
just stared at the floor until that scene was over.

I also have a vague memory of a movie in driver's ed, but the main
thing I got out of that was that you shouldn't drive too *slowly*, because
someone will try to pass you and have a head-on collision with someone
coming the other way.

Right before the prom and graduation, my high school was treated to some
horrible movie about what happened to some kids who got drunk at the prom
and had a bloody accident.

I was a pretty well-behaved kid and didn't smoke, didn't do much drinking,
and didn't drive drunk in any case. I have no idea whether those films
played a role in that.

Joyce

We didn't do Driver's Ed, but we had anti-smoking films that didn't make
any difference at all. The kids who were already smoking kept on, some
of the ones who hung around with them picked it up, and some kids who
didn't smoke anyway (like me) never started - and almost certainly
wouldn't have even without the film.

I suspect that a lot of the changes in smoking rates have been caused
more by the tendency to associate smoking with lack of education and
class than fear of lung cancer, since most teens seem to think they're
invincible, and those who don't tend to know people who've smoked for
decades without developing cancer, and also think that it hardly matters
if you die at 40 since your life is pretty well over by then. I had a
classmate, a smoker, who said as much after one of these films.

The perception of smoking has swung between 'sophisticated' and
'low-class' before, and I expect it will again. People are notoriously
bad at judging risk and changing their behaviour accordingly. They tend
to choose their behaviour for other reasons. Provide information and
hope to get a few to reduce their risk; that's the most to hope for.

--
Cheryl

"Sherry" wrote in message
...

Exactly. That's the thing about the aspca ads. They aren't an
exaggeration. It's
just the way things are, brought to your living room. They are
difficult to watch.

^ Many times when I watch Animal Planet on TV their ads bring tears to my
eyes. All those sad little faces and the kitty sticking out her paw toward
the cameraman. :*(

But puppy mills are a dirty little secret. The vast majority of the
population
doesn't even know they exist. They like it that way. Anything that
raises
awareness is good. Even the people who buy puppies don't have a clue
how
horridble conditions are for the breeding stock.


^ I remember learning about Puppy Mills back in the mid 1960s. Everyone
"into dogs" knew about them but there was no way to stop them. A surprising
number of people knew.... but we were helpless to change anything. We also
learned that as soon as one PM is put out of business, another opens down
the road. No one checks these places out. States don't demand some kind of
license and have these places visited to make sure they're humane.

Another thing is dog auctions. Nobody knows about them except the
puppy
millers, either.
Maybe the shock value will simply make it stick in someone's head. If
they,
or someone they know, ever decide to buy a purebred, just maybe
something
will click and they'll say, "I want to see the breeding facility he
came from."
I hope so anyway.

^ I hope so too! I think the ASPCA should do more about educating people
about PMs and "cat collectors." I fear I gave our Spirit to a crazy cat
collector. After she left and I looked at her card I almost died. I remember
this individual from 30 yrs ago. There is no way I can ever get the cat
back.

Sherry

I remember the week worth of nightmares I got every year as a child
when we had to watch fire safety films in school. I was so frightened
of fires, I couldn't be in a house without knowing where all the hot
air registers were so I could stay away from them (because they led to
a furnace and there was a fire in there).

I made myself watch the films anyway so I would know what to do if
there was a fire, but I wished I could have learned that without
having to SEE images of burning houses, crying kids, etc.

I accept that a lot of people won't understand how bad puppymills are
unless they see for themselves, but for someone like me, who already
knows, all those images do is make me angry, and I already have anger
issues enough. And guilty for not having more animals than I do.

--Fil


Exactly. That's the thing about the aspca ads. They aren't an
exaggeration. It's
just the way things are, brought to your living room. They are
difficult to watch.

On Dec 22, 9:43*pm, Enfilade wrote:
I remember the week worth of nightmares I got every year as a child
when we had to watch fire safety films in school. *I was so frightened
of fires, I couldn't be in a house without knowing where all the hot
air registers were so I could stay away from them (because they led to
a furnace and there was a fire in there).

I made myself watch the films anyway so I would know what to do if
there was a fire, but I wished I could have learned that without
having to SEE images of burning houses, crying kids, etc.

I accept that a lot of people won't understand how bad puppymills are
unless they see for themselves, but for someone like me, who already
knows, all those images do is make me angry, and I already have anger
issues enough. *And guilty for not having more animals than I do.

--Fil

That's me, too, Fil. They make me feel guilty. Even though in my heart
of hearts,
I know I'm close enough to being considered a collector myself.
I have five cats. I lost Yoda, then gained The Kitten. I guess I'm not
a collector
by definition, as I am still able to physically care for them and
financially
they get adequate vet attention/food. But here's the kicker. I had a
real
ephiphany about finding The Kitten a home. I've had offers. Several
offers.
Here's what holds me back: I think, "They won't take as good of care
of her
as I do." "They'll make her go outside, and she's afraid of the OUT."
That's a collector mentality and that's why they aquire so many and
won't give
any of them up. Auggg. Send me no-more-strays purrs.

Send me no-more-strays purrs.

Arg, us too. I've been laid off twice in two months, and though I'm
still contributing to the household groceries with a temporary retail
job, I'm feeling fortunate that should a large vet bill arise the cats
have a father with a steady job and not just me.

We've also figured that in our small apartment and with our schedules,
dividing proper attention between five cats would be a stretch, so
though the law in this city would allow us to have one more, we've
chosen not to go out and seek one.

We'll see how far that gets us, considering we only ever adopted ONE
of FOUR. If I find an orphaned kitten in a snowbank tomorrow I
already know we'll end up with five. (Though we've been in this city
two and a half years and still just four....)

--Fil

Kyla `=^..^=` wrote:
In a bout of insomnia, I got up last night and turned VH1-Classic Music and
the SPCA showed a vivid ad about what is done to animals for meat, kitten
and puppy mills etc, and me, being so totally sensitive, I had nightmares
all night.
Do they really think graphic ads like that will help their cause?
Maybe it's just me.
Kyla
who cares too much?



Well they could pat potential idiots on the head and ask them to please
play nice. Playing nice won't happen, but it won't hurt your
sensibilities.

Pam S.

wrote:


And you won't see most of those on American TV. Especially the smoking
and binge drinking ones, no way! I wish they would show them, but I can't
imagine anything as grim and blatant as that being allowed here. Too
much of a "downer", I guess. People might not want to buy products
advertised on the same show, if graphic cancer is shown at the same time.
American TV executives are just about the wussiest people on earth. They
tremble before the corporations and will do whatever they say.

Joyce


Here you will see some graphic ads, though not the ones that Yowie
described. The one that gets a lot of attention is the drinking and
driving one here, where drunk drivers (always male which irritates me to
no end) has booze in their vehicle and is pulled over by a police man
who asks (usually incredulously) "Sir, have you been drinking tonight?"

North Carolina has been trying to get rid of the puppy mills which have
supplied the contestants in dog fights. One of the ones in our area
supplied some of the dogs for that creep Michael Vick's fighting kennel.
Pictures of the dogs were shown on local TV and a fair amount of
coverage of the kennel owners getting arrested were also on the air. I
hope that it helps.

One of the problems in our state is kitty mills. Sick, isn't it? I
really want to be adopted by a meezer, but not from a kitty mill. I'll
see if there is a special needs Siamese available from one of the local
shelters when it is time, if ever.

American advertisers don't seem to want to be as graphic as needed to
get the point across. That's why I'm so surprised at the commercial
that Kyla reported. Usually it is of the "He's a big dog now and lives
outside" variety while an obviously lonely dog looks into the window at
the rest of the family.

Pam S. writing this as Speedy the d-owner (they all own us) lays at her
feet and under the dining room table. He likes to lick my big toes.