This Mornings paper.

Lemming

MacAonghusa wrote: »

I don't think anyone is suggesting any kind of "national evangelical drive" in fairness; but at the end of the day positive coverage is certainly better than negative coverage. Obviously.

At the moment, we as an entity need to stay out of the media. Period.

As I said, airsoft has grown exponentially and sits in an incredibly vulnerable position. Any and all media coverage only underscores that given the youth of the game in Ireland. Look at what happened with all the radio show coverage ... as Shiva said, the amount of hits to his website were astounding shortly thereafter. But that's not just the curious and the interested looking. That's every little johnny-skanger as well.

And therein lies your dilemma. No matter the coverage, johnny the skanger is going to see it. And probably get stupid ideas. And if the Gardai suddenly have a massive increase in workload from johnny skanger over this, they may well look less favourably on the existence of airsoft than their current position dictates. Factor in how young airsoft is here and you don't really need to have the possible ramifications spelt out. Good will is easily squandered.

We need consolidation right now. Not further mass expansion/awareness.

iceage

Also guys, lets not forget some of the very negative views of Airsoft that Bebo and Youtube have portrayed about the sport. Some guys are too quick to upload stuff.

MacAonghusa

Hivemind187 wrote: »

So what are your suggestions for "positive coverage"?

Well I did try to make a suggestion earlier and was essentially told to eff off.
The message is clear enough; the majority here are against any sort of promotion and that's fair enough, each to his/her own.

If you have a genuine interest in suggestions I'd be happy to discuss off thread but if you're only asking so my suggestions can be publicly shot down then you'll understand if I'm not too eager to sacrifice myself.

conor-mr2

Its very interesting reading these threads. Ive done so for years on here and am not a regular poster. This is mainly due to the way that emotion cannot be portrayed through a forum board/email etc etc.

There has probably been lots of posts here that have been taken in the wrong context.
This shouldnt be the case. Im sure we, all of us, agree that we dont want to see this hobby of ours being beaten down by the powers that be and for that we are all on the same page.

Id like to hear MacAonghusa's suggestions and it would be better if criticism, (if any) from other members, was constructive.
MacAonghusa, I dont actually think (or hope) HiveMinds reply is an attempt to shoot you down. Indeed the IAA need and welcome suggestions.
Better to have ideas from people than to run around blind in the dark.
Id rather see us all consolidated than the disgreements that I hear floating around regarding Airsoft in this country.

theres my couple of lines. And this is not an inflammatory post!!

MacAonghusa

Well one thing that I hope we can all agree on is that discussions like these are important in order to understand what members of this community think on certain issues. I don't think it's possible for a small group of individuals to know what every airsofter thinks on a particular subject and therefore effectively represent all airsofters. And there's nothing wrong with disagreements, we can't possibly agree on everything and I'd be worried if we did. And tbh I'd be very wary of any individual or organisation who runs from such discussions or doesn't welcome suggestions/discussions on important topics such as this.

Tigger

Hivemind187 wrote: »

So what are your suggestions for "positive coverage"?

someone stopping a homeinvasion using only a turnado grenada and a well p90

Tigger

MacAonghusa wrote: »

Mainly old timers up here :rolleyes:

sigh

MacAonghusa

Tigger wrote: »

sigh

Present company excluded of course!

CrazyRabbit

Lemming wrote: »

At the moment, we as an entity need to stay out of the media. Period.

As I said, airsoft has grown exponentially and sits in an incredibly vulnerable position. Any and all media coverage only underscores that given the youth of the game in Ireland. Look at what happened with all the radio show coverage ... as Shiva said, the amount of hits to his website were astounding shortly thereafter. But that's not just the curious and the interested looking. That's every little johnny-skanger as well.

And therein lies your dilemma. No matter the coverage, johnny the skanger is going to see it. And probably get stupid ideas. And if the Gardai suddenly have a massive increase in workload from johnny skanger over this, they may well look less favourably on the existence of airsoft than their current position dictates. Factor in how young airsoft is here and you don't really need to have the possible ramifications spelt out. Good will is easily squandered.

We need consolidation right now. Not further mass expansion/awareness.

Well you've done a lot to convince me of your point of view in that post.

The first line of your post is something I must address though. We can't stay out of the media. Not possible as we can't prevent them writing articles whenver they want. Do we stay away from the media and only allow negative stories, or do we approach the media and try to get positive coverage (even if we are not entirely successful)?

Regarding the rest of your post; The skangers are indeed a great danger should there be any major publicity drive. Just curious though....of all the people that buy gear from the Irish retailers each week, how many do we see at skirmishes? Probably a low number (though I am just guessing). In other words, I'd guess alot of sales are to non-skirmishers...and possibly quite a few skangers (through no fault of the retailers).

I see a danger in either stance regarding the media:

If we don't publicise the good aspects, then the public/politicians only gets informed about the negative aspects (robberies, muppets in public with aeg's, 95% of the news articles etc). How does that protect us? How does that change the public perception of airsoft into something more positive?

If we do publicise, we would get a lot more discussion or airsoft, but does that not just present an opportunity to educate, promote airsoft, or address peoples concerns? Of course, some politicians may try to use the publics general ignorance of airsoft to create fear & panic. Same can be said for some newspapers as it sells papers. And as mentioned above, you get a lot more skangers with a sudden awareness of these 'legal, but realistic looking guns'.

One more point about paintball markers and public acceptance. It's been said that this is because they don't look real. I think that's only part of it. It's well known that paintball markers can't kill. That's why they are accepted, not because they look like alien guns. It's not the AEG's that people fear, it the thought that they can kill that people fear. A small point I know, but an important one when it comes to addressing the issue.

I'm kinda on the fence now regarding media attention....I hate being on the fence. Someone convince me either way!!!!

iceage

Iceage shoves Crazyrabbit off the fence!! lets wait and see how the whole DOJ thingy works out, its not long now I believe. Week or two?

Hivemind187

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

One more point about paintball markers and public acceptance. It's been said that this is because they don't look real. I think that's only part of it. It's well known that paintball markers can't kill. That's why they are accepted, not because they look like alien guns. It's not the AEG's that people fear, it the thought that they can kill that people fear. A small point I know, but an important one when it comes to addressing the issue.

I'm kinda on the fence now regarding media attention....I hate being on the fence. Someone convince me either way!!!!

Crazy I have to disagree with the highlighted point. In all the discussions we have had with the authorities, the media (including the folks who phone the call-in shows), the politicians, the parents, the average pedestrian the single, ever resounding point is that they look too damn real.

To their minds it appears to be the realism of the kit that is the problem, that they believe it (to quote Liz McManus) "facilitates crime".

In essence what we are dealing with here is the kind of logic that is no different to that behind racism, xenophobia and assuming all Arabs are terrorists. People have been conditioned to have preconceptions about people, places, objects etc based on how they look.

It's imbuing objects with properties they do not have based on aesthetic characteristics.

It's stupid but it's true.

MacAonghusa

Hivemind187 wrote: »

... is that they look too damn real.

Is it that they simply look real OR that they look real and are therefore probably dangerous?
I've seen toys that look real but don't generate fear so therefore I'd say the latter of the two choices above is the more accurate. In which case surely the best way to address this is through education.

Hivemind187

MacAonghusa wrote: »

Is it that they simply look real OR that they look real and are therefore probably dangerous?
I've seen toys that look real but don't generate fear so therefore I'd say the latter of the two choices above is the more accurate. In which case surely the best way to address this is through education.

Again, do you have a plan to provide that education?

The following things were thought to raise the consciousness of the masses

Printed Literature
Radio
Movies
Television
the Internet

They have all failed.

I'm wondering what could be done (because I personally believe that the targetted publicity that we do is far more beneficial) to educate enough people so that ... what?

The skangers will stop using them in the street?

Panicky parents will stop calling Adrian Kennedy and Joe Duffy blaming airsoft for the crime in Limerick and Dublin?

Papers will stop printing stories about airsoft potentially being used in crime?

I'm not trying to be difficult here but if you are going to say something like "Education will fix everything" you need to tell me how and to explain the statement.

Edit: Actually, in relation to your stement. One is flowing from the other so it's pretty much nullified as a vallid question. The fact is that they look real. They are designed to look like firearms which have a specific purpose as weapons. Comparing them to a furby which really looks like a furby doll is not a valid comparisson.

CrazyRabbit

MacAonghusa wrote: »

Is it that they simply look real OR that they look real and are therefore probably dangerous?

Yes, that's what I mean. If you really get down to the core of that fear over realism, it's actually a fear of them being lethal/dangerous, just like the real thing.

And yes, of course the fear of them facilitating crime. I forgot to include that one.

As Hive said... "It's imbuing objects with properties they do not have based on aesthetic characteristics. "

Hivemind187

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

Yes, that's what I mean. If you really get down to the core of that fear over realism, it's actually a fear of them being lethal/dangerous, just like the real thing.

And yes, of course the fear of them facilitating crime. I forgot to include that one.

As Hive said... "It's imbuing objects with properties they do not have based on aesthetic characteristics. "

Which I have pointed out that you can not get around.

They look real. End of.

Get he public to change their collective consciouosness about actual firearms THEN you have a chance with this.

CrazyRabbit

Hivemind187 wrote: »

Which I have pointed out that you can not get around.

They look real. End of.

Get he public to change their collective consciouosness about actual firearms THEN you have a chance with this.

Weren't paintball markers initially thought of as being dangerous? Even if they didn't look real. At the end of the day, they still fired 'bullets at really high speed' to the uneducated.

I remember when I first heard about paintball and seen one being fired. I could believe they were legal and actually used to shoot other people. It seemed dangerous.

Yes, Airsoft has a much harder time though because the guns do look so real.

MacAonghusa

Whereas your advice is what? Bury your head in the sand, ignore all bad publicity and hope it'll go away before airsoft does? No offence intended but that's the impression i'm getting here.

I'm certainly not claiming to have all the answers (and certainly am not saying education will fix everything) but it just seems obvious to me that if only negative stories are printed people will believe that especially where there is no alternative view being put forward.

I know the IAA & probably others have tried but the message I'm getting here is 'publicity bad, end of story'.

And surely it's a bit premature to say these efforts have failed! The effort to educate ppl will take years with the end result being, to answer your question, that ppl (esp authorities) don't feel as threatened by the sport and hopefully we can secure it's future in this country.

Hivemind187 wrote: »

Again, do you have a plan to provide that education?
The following things were thought to raise the consciousness of the masses
Printed Literature
Radio
Movies
Television
the Internet

They have all failed.

I'm wondering what could be done (because I personally believe that the targetted publicity that we do is far more beneficial) to educate enough people so that ... what?
The skangers will stop using them in the street?
Panicky parents will stop calling Adrian Kennedy and Joe Duffy blaming airsoft for the crime in Limerick and Dublin?
Papers will stop printing stories about airsoft potentially being used in crime?
I'm not trying to be difficult here but if you are going to say something like "Education will fix everything" you need to tell me how and to explain the statement.

Hivemind187

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

Weren't paintball markers initially thought of as being dangerous? Even if they didn't look real. At the end of the day, they still fired 'bullets at really high speed' to the uneducated.

I remember when I first heard about paintball and seen one being fired. I could believe they were legal and actually used to shoot other people. It seemed dangerous.

Yes, Airsoft has a much harder time though because the guns do look so real.

The point is though Crazy that airsoft devices "look dangerous" and paintball markers generally dont.

It gets worse when you mention the ammo. We both know that Paintballs are actuaslly capable of causing physical harm, even potentially blinding people whereas Airsoft BB's are highly unlikely to cause any significant physical harm.

Think about it - you basically get one word that you can put into the public mind. Looking at the options we have:

Paintball.
Paint. Soft, fluid, gooey, kiddies poster paints etc. Sounds utterly harmless and carries no frightenning connotations to the uninitiated.

Pellet (which is what we are always associated with - using BB only adds an additional step to the front of the association train).
Pellet. Small. Hard. Quick. Pain.

Those are the associations that we have to contend with and thats why Paintball, though they are firearms and are capable of causing significant injury, doesnt get viewed in the same way as us.

Tigger

i still reckon we arm me with a baseball bat and (deleted) with a ak47 replica aeg and sort it thunderdome stylee

Tigger

Hivemind187 wrote: »

The point is though Crazy that airsoft devices "look dangerous" and paintball markers generally dont.

It gets worse when you mention the ammo. We both know that Paintballs are actuaslly capable of causing physical harm, even potentially blinding people whereas Airsoft BB's are highly unlikely to cause any significant physical harm.

Think about it - you basically get one word that you can put into the public mind. Looking at the options we have:

Paintball.
Paint. Soft, fluid, gooey, kiddies poster paints etc. Sounds utterly harmless and carries no frightenning connotations to the uninitiated.

Pellet (which is what we are always associated with - using BB only adds an additional step to the front of the association train).
Pellet. Small. Hard. Quick. Pain.

Those are the associations that we have to contend with and thats why Paintball, though they are firearms and are capable of causing significant injury, doesnt get viewed in the same way as us.

well put

lets rename them softys

total blanket from now on

airsofts fire softys which are specially made so as to not hurt 6mm plastic balls that weigh so little that it takes 5 thousanf of them to weight the same as a bag of sugar

CrazyRabbit

Hivemind187 wrote: »

The point is though Crazy that airsoft devices "look dangerous" and paintball markers generally dont.

It gets worse when you mention the ammo. We both know that Paintballs are actuaslly capable of causing physical harm, even potentially blinding people whereas Airsoft BB's are highly unlikely to cause any significant physical harm.

Think about it - you basically get one word that you can put into the public mind. Looking at the options we have:

Paintball.
Paint. Soft, fluid, gooey, kiddies poster paints etc. Sounds utterly harmless and carries no frightenning connotations to the uninitiated.

Pellet (which is what we are always associated with - using BB only adds an additional step to the front of the association train).
Pellet. Small. Hard. Quick. Pain.

Those are the associations that we have to contend with and thats why Paintball, though they are firearms and are capable of causing significant injury, doesnt get viewed in the same way as us.

Is this something that we simply accept as 'never going to change'?

Sorry, I can't be so pessimistic, and I have (slightly) more faith in people.

And I just want to get past the 'all publicity=bad' aspect before we start looking at actual ways to educate. One hurdle at a time.

Hivemind187

MacAonghusa wrote: »

Whereas your advice is what? Bury your head in the sand, ignore all bad publicity and hope it'll go away before airsoft does? No offence intended but that's the impression i'm getting here.

I believe OzCam gave you some advice. Instead of getting emotional and aggressive you might want to examine it first.

My advise has been (and continue to be) to target promotion to things we can control and to develop our stance from there. I.e. we continue to have a presence at events where airsoft wont be taken out of context (salute is a prime example).

You dont see practical pistol shooters going out of their way to advertise themselves to the nation. It's too "in your face" and would cause them too much trouble. The same is true for airsoft.

Paintball is an "extreme sport" and it can get away with that kind of thing because of the spandex body suits, crash helmets and nipple-tape (I assume). Corporate sponsorship from Red Bull etc helps because it is a very visual game. Airsoft isnt. there is no way for the crowd to know if you have scored or not.

... oh, and dont start accusing me of "ignoring bad publicity". It'll only make you look stupid.

MacAonghusa wrote: »

I'm certainly not claiming to have all the answers (and certainly am not saying education will fix everything) but it just seems obvious to me that if only negative stories are printed people will believe that especially where there is no alternative view being put forward.

Two things.

First - there is an alternative view being put forward. It's put forward by every person who is a legitimate airsofter. It's put forward in every letter that gets sent to a newspaper pulling them up on their errors. It's put forward everytime Sean gets on the radio and goes toe to toe with some radio-jock. It's put forward by each and every legitimate retailer every day of the week.

Second - What you are saying is that you actually dont have anything to answer my initial question with? You dont have a plan or an alternative?

MacAonghusa wrote: »

I know the IAA & probably others have tried but the message I'm getting here is 'publicity bad, end of story'.

Try reading back through the rest of this arguement spread out over a number of threads - it'll help.

MacAonghusa wrote: »

And surely it's a bit premature to say these efforts have failed! The effort to educate ppl will take years with the end result being, to answer your question, that ppl (esp authorities) don't feel as threatened by the sport and hopefully we can secure it's future in this country.

Which efforts? Radio? Television? Yes they have failed. It wasnt a comment specifically about airsoft, it is about them as mediums for conveying information and as tools for mass education.

If you mean the efforts to educate the masses with regard to airsoft then, you have to change the perception of a kalashnikov or M16 as anything other than a tool of mayhem before you can get to grips with explaing airsoft in any sort of rational fashion (from the "they look real" perspective).

The future security of airsoft does not currently lie in the positive of negative media exposure. It lies in efficient and appropriate legislation to control the problem airsoft causes for the authorities and general public.

Puding

And surely it's a bit premature to say these efforts have failed! The effort to educate ppl will take years with the end result being, to answer your question, that ppl (esp authorities) don't feel as threatened by the sport and hopefully we can secure it's future in this country.

Do people honesty thing airsoft is that important?

So we spend years reeducating people, where do you get the money where do you get the time and what benefit do you get from it?

You cannot change a image and view that is almost engrained on most people, sorry to say it but its true.

In my eyes you simply have to explain the fact to people like doj and hope common sense comes thought. People always say 'make a good press article' well when it comes down to it good airsoft news is crap news that would not sell papers so most would not be interested in it, we are not cute and fluffy and we are not a human interest story, so we just not interesting as the good guys.

Is this something that we simply accept as 'never going to change'?

Sorry, I can't be so pessimistic, and I have (slightly) more faith in people.

For me yes, no point trying to move the mountain, the large percentage of the population have no interest in airsoft, there worryed about there family and the house and the future, there is no point or even need go after them.

2 cents

Hivemind187

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

Is this something that we simply accept as 'never going to change'?

Sorry, I can't be so pessimistic, and I have (slightly) more faith in people.

Fair enouogh. I dont. Neither do most sociologists, group psychologists and jounalists/media experts.

The "group think" of the general public is simple. It's trains of through dont run deeper than the bottom of a pint of guinness. Its the same "mob mentality" that is responsible for burning Paediatricians houses down during the height of Daily Mail conjured pedo-fever in the mid nineties.

I'm not denying the individual is a clam, rational, reasonable - even affable person its just that the public at large, taken as a group are not.

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

And I just want to get past the 'all publicity=bad' aspect before we start looking at actual ways to educate. One hurdle at a time.

No one said "all publicity bad" Crazy, try not to confuse the issue any further than it already is.

There is measured and appropriate publicity i.e. Salute, college SOC's, websites etc

and then there is irresponsible and uncontrolled publicity like television, newspapers, radio and skirmishes in car parks.

MacAonghusa

Hivemind187 wrote: »

I believe OzCam gave you some advice. Instead of getting emotional and aggressive you might want to examine it first.

No ones getting emotional or aggressive. Try not to make this personal Hivemind, it's actually been an interesting exchange so far.

Hivemind187 wrote: »

Paintball is an "extreme sport" and it can get away with that kind of thing because of the spandex body suits, crash helmets and nipple-tape (I assume). Corporate sponsorship from Red Bull etc helps because it is a very visual game. Airsoft isnt. there is no way for the crowd to know if you have scored or not.

Paintball had to change for that to happen. It's not usually a spectator sport in this country. It's not impossible for airsoft to be a spectator sport, but that's one for another day i suppose.

Hivemind187 wrote: »

First - there is an alternative view being put forward. ...

Ok good and fair dues to those that take stand because it's vitally important IMO.

Hivemind187 wrote: »

Second - What you are saying is that you actually dont have anything to answer my initial question with? You dont have a plan or an alternative?

Do I have ALL the answers. No of course not.
Do I have my own ideas for promotion of the sport; yes I do and if things go as I'd like here (wrt setting up a club) then I do expect to use some of them (following due consideration/careful planning of course).

Hivemind187 wrote: »

The future security of airsoft does not currently lie in the positive of negative media exposure. It lies in efficient and appropriate legislation to control the problem airsoft causes for the authorities and general public.

Too much bad publicity and there may be no such legislation. The media does have its part to play IMO.

o1s1n

Tigger wrote: »

sigh

Tigger wrote: »

i still reckon we arm me with a baseball bat and (deleted) with a ak47 replica aeg and sort it thunderdome stylee

Tigger wrote: »

someone stopping a homeinvasion using only a turnado grenada and a well p90

Tigger wrote: »

well put

lets rename them softys

total blanket from now on

airsofts fire softys which are specially made so as to not hurt 6mm plastic balls that weigh so little that it takes 5 thousanf of them to weight the same as a bag of sugar

Stop spamming this thread with crap or you'll be banned.

Actually, don't post in it again.

gandalf

If we could control what they wrote then yes I would suggest active promotion of the sport. However the tabloids are not interested in good news. They will twist anything that we give them towards their own sensationalist aims.

Maybe some of the broadsheets should be engaged with or my preference RTE or TV3 with regard to a fluff piece on a news or activity based programme.

Things like labelling all journalists muppets or making lists of the bad points of airsoft are not helpful and tbh I have also bad mouthed the press. We should be clever in our responses here and careful in our engagements with the press.

As seen from the recent Herald bit where Eirsoft went about their business in a professional manner the paper still tried to create a sinister twist to the story.

MacAonghusa

gandalf wrote: »

If we could control what they wrote then yes I would suggest active promotion of the sport. However the tabloids are not interested in good news. They will twist anything that we give them towards their own sensationalist aims.

Why go near tabloids? Why not start with your local paper where people know you and can drop down to the local site to learn a bit more?


Edit: I have to bow out for now, things to do. Thanks for the interesting exchange

Hivemind187

MacAonghusa wrote: »

Why go near tabloids? Why not start with your local paper where people know you and can drop down to the local site to learn a bit more?

Well ... you clearly dont live in Bray then.

MacAonghusa

Hivemind187 wrote: »

Well ... you clearly dont live in Bray then.

Thankfully no.
If you already do the aforementioned (local media) then fair dues.