TVNZ7 ad

13 comments on “TVNZ7 ad ”

• Comments are now closed

1. mike 1

   2 July 2008 at 12:15 pm

   It’s really working isn’t it.. http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10519461
2. higherstandard 2

   2 July 2008 at 12:22 pm

   Good and reasoned advertisement without resorting to any hyperbole or emotion – as Mike points out there are still appalling things going on in our communities.

   The bizarre soundbite from his link as below

   “The Government is spending $14 million on a campaign to try to make family violence socially unacceptable.”

   I really hope that family violence has never been socially acceptable in NZ.
3. Lew 3

   2 July 2008 at 12:24 pm

   This `Information Changes Things’ campaign is genuinely superb. I haven’t seen such a good set of issues-based ads in a long time: they’re clear, involving, to the point, and provide questions, not answers.

   This is the best of them yet.

   Mike: The point was praising the quality of the ad, not trumpeting its success.

   Edit: HS: Since marital rape was quite recently made illegal, and hitting your kid with a riding crop was very recently made illegal, that’s a somewhat vain hope.

   L
4. mike 4

   2 July 2008 at 12:27 pm

   “Mike: The point was praising the quality of the ad, not trumpeting its success.”
   I know – I’ve just been waiting for a post to place that link on 🙂
5. Felix 5

   2 July 2008 at 12:28 pm

   I really hope that family violence has never been socially acceptable in NZ

   Depends on your family.

   And yes, of course there are still appalling things going on. What was your expectation?

   captcha: 2 moments
   It takes a bit longer to make real changes.
6. Lew 6

   2 July 2008 at 12:29 pm

   Mike: Least you’re honest.

   L
7. higherstandard 7

   2 July 2008 at 12:29 pm

   Lew

   You bias is showing.

   Felix what is your expectation of now that Section 59 has been repealed ?
8. Lew 8

   2 July 2008 at 12:37 pm

   HS: How? Don’t play the flippant hit and run with me, mate, I don’t do it to you.

   Legislation is (or should be) an expression of what is and is not socially acceptable. If certain things aren’t illegal, it’s an indication they’re socially acceptable. Not an ironclad proof, but that’s not necessary for my point.

   L
9. higherstandard 9

   2 July 2008 at 12:48 pm

   Lew my comment was relating to your comment regarding hitting your kid with a riding crop was very recently made illegal.

   This has never been legal in NZ nor I would hope socially acceptable.

   It’s sad but I think if anything NZ’s standards of what is or isn’t socially acceptable have got worse rather than better over the last few decades – although that’s not a problem that’s unique to NZ and is probably a view formed by my age to a large degree.
10. Lew 10

    2 July 2008 at 1:08 pm

    HS: “[Hitting your kid with a riding crop] has never been legal in NZ nor I would hope socially acceptable.”

    Since someone was acquitted of assault charges after admittedly doing just that, it clearly was determined to be legal in at least one case. It was these sorts of high-profile cases which led to the s59 repeal.

    Perhaps it was disingenuous of me to argue that it was socially acceptable, since only lobby groups with the word `Family’ in them found it acceptable, in the context of ongoing violence between mother and son.

    L
11. Matthew Pilott 11

    2 July 2008 at 1:36 pm

    mike gives new meaning to a “Text(or)-book play hit-and-run”.

    mike, that law change has contributed to increased reporting of domestic violence, and made it an important and heavily debated issue, as illustrated by news coverage of such cases. That’s good, right?

    HS – the ad illustrates a case where people thought abuse of a child was acceptable. I think the “not my problem” attitude illustrated is linked to the anti-“nanny-state” mentality – the concept that a family’s business is its own and untouchable to others.
12. David S. 12

    2 July 2008 at 5:33 pm

    What’s been bugging me since it’s removal is the idea of the so-called, “Wall of shame” that supposedly belongs to Sue Bradford. Every time a child is beaten or killed it’s all her fault, since apparently we all thought this would magically transform our society into a non violent utopia.

    Apparently, for some of the more extreme members of the right, the idea of self responsibility goes out the window as long as there’s a “Socialist” to blame. It really drives home the point that we’re bound to end up with some kind of “Socialism” (A miss-use of the word, but this seems to be how it’s used in contemporay conversation) whichever side of the fence you sit on. Crony Capitalism or Social Democracy?
13. QoT 13

    2 July 2008 at 11:08 pm

    Nice ad. Unfortunately, my instinctive eyerolling every time I see a “Free”view ad has caused eye-muscle-strain to be inevitably linked in my head to TVNZ7.

    Captcha: “in generation”. Eerily appropriate.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS