Posted on Wednesday, September 02, 2009 - 02:19 pm:
You mean to tell me that WWF didn't have any clue/idea/common sense to figure out that just MAYBE they should be directly involved in DDB's (the ad agency) work here?
Posted on Wednesday, September 02, 2009 - 02:29 pm:
Sounds more like this ad company has motives of their own. THEY approach companies with "pro-bono" ads, and if they're rejected, they're mysteriously released anyway?
Posted on Wednesday, September 02, 2009 - 09:11 pm:
Where were you? Happened at some ridiculous hour of the morning for here. I saw it on the news and had to double-take. The news presenter was at the end of her shift and ended up having to stay to follow the whole story through. It unfolded and I remembered thinking "Holy S#*t!, now hell's gonna break loose all over the world"
The two events are just non-comparable. Even though it wasn't WWF who issued it, what would make another company trying to pitch a campaign use these examples? Preserving the planet or not, could we really have stopped a tsunami?? As this is a little further away from home for us, we debated a comparable situation based on events that happened here to define how Australians would feel faced with the same ad. It was decided we could have hot tempers and shorter fuses about it too....
Posted on Wednesday, September 02, 2009 - 09:51 pm:
Yeah, totally innocent & unauthorized by WWF...
Sergio Valente, president of DDB Brasil, said the ad was presented to the WWF in Brazil in December 2008 and approved; it then ran once in a small local paper...After the WWF appeared to initially deny approving the ad, DDB Brasil and the WWF hammered out a statement posted in Portuguese on both groups' Brazilian websites Wednesday afternoon apologizing for the ad and attributing it to "the inexperience of some professionals on both sides, and not bad faith or disrespect toward American suffering."
Posted on Wednesday, September 02, 2009 - 10:18 pm:
Someone should send the ****s a dictionary with the words 'catastrophe' and 'murder' highlighted so the ****s know the difference. Dave, I wasn't trying to trivialise the issue at all. I know it was a horrible, devastating event, but I just meant that it's easy to forget just how horrible things are when they don't happen in your own back yard. When something happens that far away, the impact isn't the same as it is if it was your brother or neighbour that was involved directly. Rest assured we know the above meanings.
...cool.
