Question of the Day, September 30, 2010

[Kris015]

How is that taking it too far? There's really nothing wrong with it and certainly nothing worse than what Peta has done.

This
The WWF is going against something much more specific, and it makes sense. It's not like they are trying to stop all hunting, they just want to keep the endangered species safe so that in the future those animals can be hunted occasionally and without worry of extinction.

These. It's a good way to get peoples attention, this poaching thing indeed is a problem, and we've had our fair share of creepy commercials here in Denmark too, but apperently they work.

 

[JimJamJahar]

I think it is a clever way to raise awareness. But I'll be honest, I couldn't stop laughing when I first read about it

 

[Seriin]

This isn't a bad ad because of the violence, it is a bad ad because it targets the wrong people. The people in these clothing stores have nothing to do with the tiger poaching and likewise can't do anything about said tiger poaching. This isn't even at a fur shop so you can show the people who are supporting the poachers what an "easy target" the tigers are..

This whole ad campaign reeks of "this will get on the news" and what after that? Is this what the WWF is doing with the donation money that they receive? Instead of spearheading initiatives that get the governments to intervene more in the poachers crimes they create a "shocking" advert that serves no purpose other than telling people yet again that the tigers are in danger. We know this already, this is why we donate money to organizations who claim to want to put an end to this nonsense, you know, like the WWF.

 

[Absimilliard]

I find this absolutely brilliant. The intention was to raise awareness, and I believe they succeeded quite well for two reasons:
1) 3000 shirts + stickers = 200.000 signatures on their petition
2) This very thread. And I don't believe for a second that this is the only forum where this discussion is being held right now.

Did it scare some people?
Yes.
Boo-hoo. The world isn't always nice.

 

[MikailCaboose]

I suppose it's interesting, but just because awareness is raised I just don't see it as being that particularly effective to stop poaching.

 

[TLatshaw]

I'm still not really sure where my opinion lies on the whole mirror thing, but it makes me want to play Eternal Darkness.

 

[bue519]

I suppose you can tell some one the stove is hot or you can just hold their hand on it.

The problem is, most people wouldn't listen to the message unless you really got their attention, like by... I dunno, making them think they've been shot? You can say things like this that are true, and most people would just ignore you.

True, but what is someone abhors blood and because I'll from the sight of it. It seems unethical to set these up in public places and unleash them on an unsuspecting public. Now if they had like a mobile program, where they showed people what being "poached" felt like then thats would be okay. But they're just targeting unsuspecting people and that seems wrong. Lets hope no one with a heart condition tries on that t-shirt.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

WWF wasn't clever with this campaign. It was plain outright stupid and does nothing. How many people that tried on those shirts were people that actually support killing tigers? Of course, none. I've encountered many people that when they get exposed to campaigns like these, they actually form opposite opinion, because there is no need to use tactics like these to get people aware of such things. They will have the idea that, "Well you harassed me with this stupid act, I will do the same to you."

I would say that everybody is aware that people poach animals, if there are people that weren't, I would ask them, "What rock were you hiding under?"
This is the type of campaign that if I was thinking of giving money to this foundation, I would have told them that they screwed up and they won't be getting money.

Seriously, if you can't find a more decent way to raise awareness than scare tactics with blood, give up.

WWF, you crashed and burned with this idea.

200,000 thousand people now don't support tiger poaching, you say?

Well I bet everyone of those people didn't support it in the first place, they just hadn't been asked about it.

 

[Numb1lp]

They certainly have the right to do so, but it didn't bring attention to the poaching situation to me.

 

[thublihnk]

Fuck, I misvoted. I thought the third result read "I don't think it gets the point across well, but it's disturbing."

Which is about how I feel.

 

[Ewyx]

A campaign like this generates worldwide publicity. Hell, if they'd be passing out fliers or even a full billboard, it would perhaps generate a few looks. But a campaign like this creates more than just awareness, it forces people to discuss the campaign.

The most important part about having a campaign is not to get the message across but to force people into a dialogue, because a message is passive, and people perceive it, but with this crap, the campaign makes people think and discuss it.

Also, as mentioned before, it's still not remotely as bad as some PETA shit. It's shocking, but it doesn't degrade anyone, nor does it imply that your parents are nazis (Holocaust on your plate).

 

[SageRuffin]

And here I was thinking that wrestling had gone back to being worth watching, complete with the ever awesome "McMahon Strut".

 

[Kapol]

I suppose you can tell some one the stove is hot or you can just hold their hand on it.

The problem is, most people wouldn't listen to the message unless you really got their attention, like by... I dunno, making them think they've been shot? You can say things like this that are true, and most people would just ignore you.

True, but what is someone abhors blood and because I'll from the sight of it. It seems unethical to set these up in public places and unleash them on an unsuspecting public. Now if they had like a mobile program, where they showed people what being "poached" felt like then thats would be okay. But they're just targeting unsuspecting people and that seems wrong. Lets hope no one with a heart condition tries on that t-shirt.

I understand what you mean, which is why I pointed out that it wasn't really fair to target people who weren't neccessarily even involved in buying fur coats and such.

I don't think this is too far, but it might not be fair to the people involved. After all, who knows if those people even had bought or planned to buy furs? Or for that matter, who's to say they weren't already for the cause, which would be why they were buying the T-shirt? It's an interesting method, but it should be worked out a bit better instead of scaring the shit out of people.

The point I tried to make (though I have a habit of not saying it right) was that it was a interesting idea and that it likely worked fairly well, but they really should have worked it out a bit better with more of a focus on people who would actually be affected instead of just everyone.

 

[Drexlor]

It sounds like a good idea to me.

 

[garfoldsomeoneelse]

A few points:

1.) What "trendy shops" sell white t-shirts with giant tiger heads on them?
2.) I hope the stores like losing sales from shocked customers.
3.) What does this even show? That people who don't hunt animals and who aren't even trying on animal products will start bleeding from their chests if they think about tigers?

There wasn't a "WTF does this prove" poll option though (or even a "doesn't get the point across" option). :/

That's pretty much everything I was going to say. Seriously, it's not making much of a point. If anything, it's on par with a musician stopping halfway through their set at a concert to give a speech on environmentalism: it's unsolicited and the only reason you have peoples' attention to begin with is because of something that is only tangentially related (at best). Both are annoying.

Also, tiger shirts? Trendy? Get with the times, people.

Awwwww yeaaaaah.​

 

[Nieroshai]

They're going the PETA route it seems. Not good. Next the Sierra Club will restirct access to our national parks--wait...

 

[Feylynn]

I think being shot in this manner would improve my day. It would be pretty funny honestly. That said it doesn't make me more aware or concerned for the tigers, nor would it make me feel threatened or endangered... But it's fun... As fun as primitive augmented reality applications can be anyways. It helps that it's in an unlikely place such as a store, not somewhere where it would be annoying and stupid like online (Clarifying that I know about their site but it doesn't count because it would be pretty lame.)

Also, amusing that I have proof in this poll that it actually managed to bother some people.

 

[teisjm]

I really, really don't see how this add is controversial in any way.