Comments for TipsyToes

Comment on Oh, look at all the pretty colours! by Tom

Tom — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 14:31:25 +0000

Ooh.. someone’s learnt some fancy new netlingo. “Troll”. Brr. A troll btw is someone who repeatedly (as in many many times more than my 2) buts into a conversation merely in order to annoy. Much as you’d crave a troll, I’m sorry I don’t waste comments like that.
If I chose to use one more comment than I’d reserved to make my point with you its because I hadn’t until now, realized you’re so closed to the idea of your posts taking a different turn than anticipated.
As to your being offended, there was no offence to be taken by you -not unless you’re offended generally by the notion that others may hold points of view at variance with your own. Or unless you’re employed by Benetton. I was merely making a point that is important to me which I thought was lost when you winked it away. Perhaps you don’t sympathise with it, but that’s no reason to have taken offence. It shows your propensity to be easily offended rather than my offensiveness.
Go easy on the threats. They don’t impress me. You’ve done it before and it sounds stupid each time, but I make light of it – it is your blog too. You seem to want to make this your blog entirely. Perhaps I will relent.

Comment on Oh, look at all the pretty colours! by Tipsy Toes

Tipsy Toes — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 03:04:54 +0000

The one who’s missing the point is you, Tom!. While Benetton and their advertising and ‘brand defacement’ are all very interesting, my post was about none of those things. It was about the use of domestic violence in what appeared to be a violently misogynistic and completely sick Benetton ad campaign. If Benetton now says this isn’t a campaign of theirs, I’ll take them at their word.

My apology and retention of the post, indeed, had nothing to do with implicating Benetton. That is why my earlier comment (5) ended in a wink. you seen not to understand what this post was about – maybe you need to read it once again. My point you see, is about using domestic violence as a shock vehicle and is not limited to Benetton. Your earlier comment, being off-topic and offensive at that, is extremely trollish, except perhaps for the fact that this is your blog too. Which is why I chose to make light of it.

If you want to discuss No Logo, subversion of brands, and this ‘ad’ as an example of the subversion, do write a post. Just don’t do it in my commentspace. If you do, I will delete trollish comments, do remember.

Comment on Oh, look at all the pretty colours! by Tom

Tom — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 23:55:36 +0000

Sigh. “Wrong info” so completely misses the point. Assuming that UCB isn’t responsible for this ad, then this was a deliberate act of brand defacement/parody specifically targetting UCB’s previous co-option of social issues into its adwork. The message isn’t “This is a UCB ad” as much as it is “This is how low UCB is probably going to sink to next – we are going to be sold all of our social pathologies one at a time”.

Your apology and retention of the post has nothing to do with implicating Benetton. If anything, from your post alone, the heat is entirely off Benetton, and is now merely a tame “Tut tut” conceivably to some alter-Benetton who may someday attempt to co-opt domestic violence into its ads in a similar fashion. My point is sqarely about Benetton and not restricted to the issue of domestic violence. I find the entire range of its social-issue-mongering offensive.

I dont think the creator of these subversive ads would have a way of conveying this through “right info”.

Comment on Oh, look at all the pretty colours! by Tipsy Toes

Tipsy Toes — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 06:48:59 +0000

The apology was to readers, Tom: wrong info is wrong info, after all! If you notice, I didn’t take the post down!

Comment on Oh, look at all the pretty colours! by Tom

Tom — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 03:06:57 +0000

I think the apology is not owed. Benetton had this coming. This is a company that has, in the past, leveraged issues like AIDS and racism to boost its own sales under the pretext of drawing attention to them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benetton_Group
In 2006, Benetton spent 71,537,000 euros on crowding our cityscapes with their adverts, and nothing at all towards eliminating hunger and disease.
I’m just done reading Naomi Klein’s brilliant “No logo” in which she points to “culture jamming” – the subversion of ads – as a way to strike back at companies attempting to make money out of sensitive social issues. So the more bad press that benetton gets because of instances like this, I think, the better.

Comment on Oh, look at all the pretty colours! by Tipsy Toes

Tipsy Toes — Sat, 02 Jun 2007 06:52:26 +0000

Thanks, Eco. I meant to post the update yesterday, but it didn’t upload, apparently.

Comment on Oh, look at all the pretty colours! by Eco

Eco — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 18:03:02 +0000

Curiouser and Curiouser…

From the comments in another blog

THIS IS NOT A BENETTON AD CAMPAIGN!

Dear All,
this is NOT a United Colors of Benetton advertising campaign. Please don’t be deceived, see the official Benetton Group website http://www.benettongroup.com

Best regards,
Federico Sartor

Direttore Stampa e Comunicazione Istituzionale
Benetton Group
Tel. 39 0422 519036
Fax 39 0422 519930
http://www.benettongroup.com/press
http://www.benettonpress.mobi

Comment on Oh, look at all the pretty colours! by Domestic violence goes colourful* « Canace

Domestic violence goes colourful* « Canace — Wed, 30 May 2007 11:06:57 +0000

[...] *Cross-posted. Sort of. [...]

Comment on About by Gleeful Observer

Gleeful Observer — Wed, 16 May 2007 08:48:24 +0000

A.Tom, TT, A.Smith, Aerosmith Guy et al., please do continue this conversation. Its extremely entertaining. Especially in the afternoon, when I’m fighting off sleep and trying to work… this is exactly what i need!!

Comment on BatBaby by Tipsy Toes

Tipsy Toes — Fri, 11 May 2007 08:09:42 +0000

Thank you! *Some* people could only laugh at this story…