Looks like Largo foods are at it again.

Morag

http://www.thejournal.ie/camogie-chief-says-crisp-ads-are-just-not-hunky-dory-219677-Sep2011/

THE PRESIDENT OF the Camogie Association has hit out the controversial Hunk Dorys crisps adverts which depict scantily-clad women playing GAA.

Joan O’Flynn was speaking after the launch of the latest ad campaign by Hunky Dorys makers Largo Foods this week in which two girls teams in gold and emerald coloured, tight-fitting bikini costumes try their hand at a bit of Gaelic football.

It follows on from last year’s newspaper advertising campaign which featured the girls playing rugby.

The hugely successful campaign, which increased the Hunky Dorys brand’s net worth by over €1 million, led to widespread controversy and criticism with the adverts subject of a number of complaints to the advertising watchdog.

And the Advertising Standards Authority for Ireland has already received complaints in relation to this year’s campaign.

Speaking on RTÉ’s Morning Ireland, O’Flynn said the ads were ill-timed given that camogie’s top teams will be in action at various levels in the All-Ireland finals at Croke Park this Sunday.

She said the ads “trivialises the talent and ability of women in sport” by focussing on their physical appearance rather than their sporting ability. She said that more “responsible advertising would focus on the skill and the ability of the players as athletes.”

The GAA has already said it was not consulted on the campaign.

Meath-based manufacturers Largo Foods, which owns the Hunky Dorys brand, has broken its silence on the controversy, CEO Ray Coyle telling the Irish Independent “we have to attract attention one way or another”.

But O’Flynn said this morning: “It may travel, and it’s a well established fact that that sort of advertising sells, but it sells on what I would call fairly poor values.”

I had just gone back to buying that brand, it's back on the banned list now.

If anyone does want to lodge a complaint the link to the online forum is
http://www.asai.ie/complain.asp

analucija

Oh this is sooo predictable. I had an advertising teacher who once said that only people without ideas use sex in adds. However this is getting ridiculous. Largo do a tacky add and a couple of idiots who want to prove their feminist credentials pop out and complain about it all over media instead doing some serious work. If they want to moan about objectification of women it would be better to do something about the need to have an "irish model" present at the opening of every sewage plant or charity event. At the moment they are just helping Hunky Dory to get good media coverage and sell more crisps. If everybody would just quietly complain to advertising authority or ignore the add, I bet that there wouldn't be one this year.

Ah I'll be honest I really don't care about them

I mean... it's just an ad
Nothing to go boycotting their products for, imo

Malari

analucija wrote: »

Oh this is sooo predictable. I had an advertising teacher who once said that only people without ideas use sex in adds. However this is getting ridiculous. Largo do a tacky add and a couple of idiots who want to prove their feminist credentials pop out and complain about it all over media instead doing some serious work. If they want to moan about objectification of women it would be better to do something about the need to have an "irish model" present at the opening of every sewage plant or charity event. At the moment they are just helping Hunky Dory to get good media coverage and sell more crisps. If everybody would just quietly complain to advertising authority or ignore the add, I bet that there wouldn't be one this year.

I agree, except that few people would really get the urge to complain unless goaded by the likes of current affairs shows highlighting the fact that they "should" be offended.

The ads don't really bother me that much. Not so much that I'd complain.

Live4Ever

I think its great.

What about the Special K ad with the girls in bikinis?

Or the many hair product ads with girls in the shower?

kingtut

An ad including a couple of girls in revealing clothing increased their net worth by that much!!!

I guess people really do fall for such stupid advertising, can't say I would personally buy anything just because there was a half clothed women on it! :eek:

Owen

Personally, I think it's bad taste and it doesn't entice me to buy anything - but I'm wondering what all the guffaw is about. Diet Coke used men as sexual objects for a very long time, and that's deemed acceptable. Surely what's good for the goose?

LeeHoffmann

Using sexy bodies to sell crisps doesn't bother me - way too used to it for that. The only thing that ever bothered me about these ads was that I thought they shouldn't be associated with rugby (a family-oriented, inclusive sport). I didn't like that, but very little would bother me enough to complain

krudler

ughh, this sh1te again. Its a tongue in cheek ad not to be taken seriously, like the Club Orange one. sex in ads makes people take notice, and the more people that complain and tell people to be offended the more notice is taken. It baffles me why the "someone think of the children" brigade do their best to make sure EVERYONE knows about the ads rather than ignoring them, surely thats the opposite effect of what they're trying to do?

Malari

Live4Ever wrote: »

I think its great.

What about the Special K ad with the girls in bikinis?

Or the many hair product ads with girls in the shower?

Well the idea is that eating Special K will give you that particular fabulous body and that hair products are to be used in the shower.

The H-D ad is using women gratuitously because you don't need to get near naked to eat hunky-dories, nor will they give you the figures of the ladies featured.

#Disclaimer: I am aware Special K is not exactly healthy food, and I am just explaining the difference - I don't disagree with the use of women in this ad.

Logical Fallacy

kingtut wrote: »

An ad including a couple of girls in revealing clothing increased their net worth by that much!!!

It was actually a combination of the ad and new more competitive price points...but the ads get all the credit because Marketing Departments are really good at claiming credit for things.

Eever

bluewolf wrote: »

Ah I'll be honest I really don't care about them

I mean... it's just an ad
Nothing to go boycotting their products for, imo

I agree. It's just an ad, I actually find the uproar about it a bit embarrassing.

Also, giving it all this attention is just playing right into their hands. After all the controversy surrounding the rugby version and all the complaints it received they got a hell of a lot more attention. Good or bad, any attention is good as far as they're concerned, so they made this one to get everyones knickers in a twist all over again in the hopes of getting more attention for them and it's working.

LeeHoffmann

Has anybody heard anyone talking about it though? The only place I've 'heard' any talk on it at all is boards :pac:

tallaghtmick

Ahem

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdrE1VMxzoE

Its only a bit of advertising and a tad bit of skin,what about perfume and aftershave ads that have nearly naked people in them?

KittyeeTrix

Doesn't bother me in the slightest at all.......

Sonics2k

Ironically, the amount of controversy kicked up about this ad causes much more advertising for Pringles than a couple of women ever could.

Also as Tallaghtmick points out, men get used in these kinds of ads as well.
It's an advertising technique.

Morag

Yes men have been used that way in a very small number of ads and it's just as out of context and wrong imho.

But that 1 add does not by any means justify the 100s of ads using women.

analucija

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

Has anybody heard anyone talking about it though? The only place I've 'heard' any talk on it at all is boards :pac:

D'Arcy (who else) had somebody on today and I heard of it somewhere else too but don't know where. I haven't seen the add yet. I wouldn't even notice last year's ad if there wouldn't be so much fuss about it.

Sonics2k

Sharrow wrote: »

Yes men have been used that way in a very small number of ads and it's just as out of context and wrong imho.

But that 1 add does not by any means justify the 100s of ads using women.

It's an eyecatcher.
However the advertising companies are more than aware that seeing a bunch of women run around playing GAA is not going to sell Pringles. They know that the people complaining will cause a lot more advertising for them.

Marty McFly

Oh here come the pg brigade again get over it. Sex sells. Men are used in the exact same way except we just dont feel the need to kick up a fuss and if we do its generally laughed off.

Its a hamrless ad showing a bit of cleavage, you can walk down any street in Ireland and see cleavage its no big deal. Theres ads out there with a lot more flesh on display than this one. Some women need to realise you no longer have to fight for equal rights yous have them and trying to push your agenda over silly things like this just makes them look bad.

Scarlet 27

There are adds using men and women wearing very little clothing but as previously stated it is to try and get it into peoples minds that if they use X product they will a) look like said half naked male/female model or b) that they will attract people who look like said male/female model which I don't necessarily agree with but at least there is some sort of intelligence and logic behind it.

As crisps are not aimed at a particular gender the point of the add is to cause controversy and this company have chosen to do that by using half naked women which I personally have a problem with (it is not that I find the images of the women offencive just the context in which they are using them).

I haven't made any complaints but I don't buy their products because why would I support a company who couldn't be bothered to implement an advertising campaign that might actually make me want to but there products which is what I personally think advertising should be about.

westies4ever

ah now really whats the big deal? That ad with matthew mcconaughey getting his top off to advertise aftershave, never fails to brighten my day if I happen to catch it, so let the lads have their fun too.

http://youtu.be/8yYfBlIzavI

Scarlet 27

westies4ever wrote: »

ah now really whats the big deal? That ad with matthew mcconaughey getting his top off to advertise aftershave, never fails to brighten my day if I happen to catch the it, so let the lads have their fun too.

http://youtu.be/8yYfBlIzavI

Because the point of that add is that if said normal guy uses the aftershave they will look as good as Mr McConaughey not to purposefully offend men with a view to raising the brands profile I am sorry but there is a difference.

Take for example the lynx add out at the moment where a guy takes a shower on the beach, the women are prob wearing less clothes than in the Largo add but the concept is different. The marketing is aimed at men for a male product saying use the product and you will get the hot girls not specifically done with the aim of offending females and I think you will find most women don't have a problem with it or at least I haven't heard of any women complaining about it.

Most people are not prudes and know sex sells but that does not mean it is ok to use unintelligent and lazy advertising to purposely try and offend one gender with a view to raising your profile.

westies4ever

how is it 'lazy and unitelligent' if we're all talking about it??? isnt that what they set out to do? it is crisps we're talking about here arent we??

Jam

Scarlet 27 wrote: »

Most people are not prudes and know sex sells but that does not mean it is ok to use unintelligent and lazy advertising to purposely try and offend one gender with a view to raising your profile.

Then why take the bait?

And why is it that only the one gender that ever gets offended?

Morag

It's funny that men only get offended/object when they can use it to play down women objecting.

Maruney

I had just gone back to buying that brand, it's back on the banned list now.

If anyone does want to lodge a complaint the link to the online forum is
http://www.asai.ie/complain.asp[/QUOTE]


Well done helping them reach their goal, you are actually helping by bringing it up on a public forum.
The marketing boss at Largo is female BTW.

What about the female beach volleyball players who are now stamping ad's on their ass cheek, encouraging us to look.

What rock do you live under? Sex sells, women are sexier than men and have always been looked upon that way and probably always will be, its the way of the world get over it.

Logical Fallacy

luvbulmers01 wrote: »

Oh here come the pg brigade

What's the pg brigade?

It sounds cinematic.

Scarlet 27

westies4ever wrote: »

how is it 'lazy and unintelligent' if we're all talking about it??? isnt that what they set out to do? it is crisps we're talking about here arent we??

In my opinion it is lazy and unintelligent because if they had a better ad company doing the work they might increase their profile in a more positive way by doing some work and coming up with an original idea instead of going for an outdated and unoriginal campaign.

If a companies only aim is to get people talking irrelevant of what they are saying then thats fine. However it is possible to get people talking about an ad which doesn't cause offence to anyone if the people who are working on the campaign are bright enough to come up with something new and fresh, people will talk and usually it will be in a positive light. This not only raises the brands profile but improves the opinion of the brand with its market. If you can't be bothered to do this fine but I would consider this a lazy way to approach advertising and is the reasoning behind my previous post.

bobbysands81

Sharrow wrote: »

http://www.thejournal.ie/camogie-chief-says-crisp-ads-are-just-not-hunky-dory-219677-Sep2011/




I had just gone back to buying that brand, it's back on the banned list now.

If anyone does want to lodge a complaint the link to the online forum is
http://www.asai.ie/complain.asp

Any chance of actually explaining why you're offended by this ad?

westies4ever

Scarlet 27 wrote: »

In my opinion it is lazy and unintelligent because if they had a better ad company doing the work they might increase their profile in a more positive way by doing some work and coming up with an original idea instead of going for an outdated and unoriginal campaign.

If a companies only aim is to get people talking irrelevant of what they are saying then thats fine. However it is possible to get people talking about an ad which doesn't cause offence to anyone if the people who are working on the campaign are bright enough to come up with something new and fresh, people will talk and usually it will be in a positive light. This not only raises the brands profile but improves the opinion of the brand with its market. If you can't be bother to do this fine but I would consider this a lazy way to approach advertising and is the reasoning behind my previous post.

it's a disgrace joe. yawn.

rainbow kirby

westies4ever wrote: »

it's a disgrace joe. yawn.

Not helpful. If this is all you have to say on the issue, don't post on this thread again.

Scarlet 27

The marketing boss at Largo is female BTW.

Seriously what has that got to do with anything? As per previous post I am not impressed with the campaign and believe that a better ad team could have come up with a better ad campaign thats not going to change because a female was involved in the process! Both men and women can be bad at there jobs and it so happens that a women is responsible in this case. It doesn't make the lack of marketing talent and originality any less appalling or reproachable! Fine she doesn't haven't a problem with the ad or can't be bother to come up with a better campaign it doesn't mean that other women have to agree with her.

tweedledee

Ahh give over.An Irish company uses semi naked girls to sell a product and theres "outrage".Nothing ever said though bout the thousands of foreign ads doing the same to sell beauty products,lotions,clothes etc etc.
Just like Ryanair they got attention.
Dont ya just love the Irish "feminists" jumping on the bandwagon with their "its a disgrace,I'm not buying their product ever again".If they took that attitude with everything well???????????
Its 2011 not the 1950's.

tweedledee

Scarlett,so Kraft Foods,Nivea,Dolce Gabana,Versace,BMW,YSL,Elizabeth Arden,Pepsi,Nike,Reebok etc etc etc all have terrible marketing departments??????
They,and thousands of other brands use SEX to sell their products.Have you seen the new Dove adverts girl???????????

Scarlet 27

tweedledee wrote: »

Scarlett,so Kraft Foods,Nivea,Dolce Gabana,Versace,BMW,YSL,Elizabeth Arden,Pepsi,Nike,Reebok etc etc etc all have terrible marketing departments??????
They,and thousands of other brands use SEX to sell their products.Have you seen the new Dove adverts girl???????????

Please see previous post which I have copied and pasted as you appear to not have read it before you posted

"There are adds using men and women wearing very little clothing but as previously stated it is to try and get it into peoples minds that if they use X product they will a) look like said half naked male/female model or b) that they will attract people who look like said male/female model which I don't necessarily agree with but at least there is some sort of intelligence and logic behind it.

As crisps are not aimed at a particular gender the point of the add is to cause controversy and this company have chosen to do that by using half naked women which I personally have a problem with (it is not that I find the images of the women offencive just the context in which they are using them). "

tweedledee

Exactly Owen.Even the weather girls in Spain,South America,Italy,Germany etc look like porn stars!!!!!!!
I love the Colombian weather channel,nice
All Sky Sports/News female presenters always have cleavage on show but no complaints!!!Strange no??

westies4ever

rainbow kirby wrote: »

Not helpful. If this is all you have to say on the issue, don't post on this thread again.

my apologies but the 'preachy' tone of the post aimed at me irritated. i'm not offended by the advert yet it seems i'm not entitled to my opinion or that i'm wrong.

forestman

Surely though these ads will help raise the profile of Camogie and ladies football?

tweedledee

Most companies in the world use sex to sell their product Scarlet.Even airlines do it.
Why do Korean Airlines use superhot models,walking very provacatively through an airport????????Makes no sense but it gets yer attention.Thats their aim.Job done.
You seem to have issues because its an Irish product and for sure in Ireland we are all 100% law abiding citizens who go to mass everyday,dont swear in public,keep the streets nice and clean,we dont drink,take drugs or partake in criminal acts,our Government are very honest ohh and so are all the priests!!!!!Ahh the 1950's

Malari

forestman wrote: »

Surely though these ads will help raise the profile of Camogie and ladies football?

They don't seem to be discussing this ad in the GAA forum :pac:

Scarlet 27

tweedledee wrote: »

Most companies in the world use sex to sell their product Scarlet.Even airlines do it.
Why do Korean Airlines use superhot models,walking very provacatively through an airport????????Makes no sense but it gets yer attention.Thats their aim.Job done.
You seem to have issues because its an Irish product and for sure in Ireland we are all 100% law abiding citizens who go to mass everyday,dont swear in public,keep the streets nice and clean,we dont drink,take drugs or partake in criminal acts,our Government are very honest ohh and so are all the priests!!!!!Ahh the 1950's

I am sorry I don't know where you are getting the Irish thing from I didn't even know the company was Irish until you or someone else posted on here so that hasn't affected my opinion.

pickarooney

What would a good ad for crisps look like?

krudler

Sharrow wrote: »

Yes men have been used that way in a very small number of ads and it's just as out of context and wrong imho.

But that 1 add does not by any means justify the 100s of ads using women.

1 ad? seriously? remember the Galaxy chocoloate ad with a guy in a towel? how bout Matthew McConnaghey strolling around in the nip flogging aftershave? theres dozens and dozens of examples where men are objectified and degraded. the Boots xmas campaign ridicules men constantly, same as ads for car insurance, cleaning products etc etc. anyone who takes marketing campaigns seriously needs to find something else to worry about, they're adverts.

stimpson

Scarlet 27 wrote: »

P
As crisps are not aimed at a particular gender the point of the add is to cause controversy and this company have chosen to do that by using half naked women which I personally have a problem with (it is not that I find the images of the women offencive just the context in which they are using them). "

Actually, Hunky Dorys are marketed at men. The ads are targeted at men, not targeted to offend women, and they work very well, which is why they are being repeated. If they have increased profits of the company they have worked, regardless of how lazy you seem to think they are. Advertising is not art - it's business.

And I don't see how the context has anything to do with it. It's not the context that you find offensive, but the content. Why is it OK to use semi naked women to sell corn flakes or perfume - that's just double standards.

krudler

These days you wouldnt get away with the Kia-Ora "too orangey for crows" tagline, there'd be some group protesting that crows are being discriminated against in an ad campaign, those majestic birds have every right to drink that delicious orangey goodness just like the rest of us.

Malari

stimpson wrote: »

And I don't see how the context has anything to do with it. It's not the context that you find offensive, but the content. Why is it OK to use semi naked women to sell corn flakes or perfume - that's just double standards.

Hmm, not sure about that. It's about the use of cleavage to sell something totally unrelated to cleavage or making yourself attractive to the opposite sex.

It would be interesting to see how many of the people offended by this ad were/would be also offended by the Wonderbra "hello boys" campaign with Eva Herzigova. It was using cleavage to advertise...well, cleavage.

NSFW (I suppose!) http://www.handbag.com/fashion/features/top-10/top-10-iconic-ad-campaigns-101074

The context is surely a bit important.

gargleblaster

Ads like this are banned in Norway and Denmark. It's a good start.

Using sex to sell every damn thing under the sun is IMO encouraging stupidity. I for one do not want to see Idiocracy become any closer to reality than it already is.

For that reason, I support forcing idiotic sales people to restrain their unbridled and truly breathtaking creativity, and only use sexualized images to sell things that are somehow related to those images.

gargleblaster

krudler wrote: »

These days you wouldnt get away with the Kia-Ora "too orangey for crows" tagline, there'd be some group protesting that crows are being discriminated against in an ad campaign, those majestic birds have every right to drink that delicious orangey goodness just like the rest of us.

Is this example of over-the-top sarcasm supposed to contribute to the discussion somehow?

Morag

krudler wrote: »

1 ad? seriously? remember the Galaxy chocoloate ad with a guy in a towel?

Yup I do remember it the company dropped it as it became clear it was not welcomed.

krudler wrote: »

how bout Matthew McConnaghey strolling around in the nip flogging aftershave?

That one has context the crisp ad's don't.

krudler wrote: »

theres dozens and dozens of examples where men are objectified and degraded. the Boots xmas campaign ridicules men constantly, same as ads for car insurance, cleaning products etc etc. anyone who takes marketing campaigns seriously needs to find something else to worry about, they're adverts.

And what about them? Have you ever registered a complaint about even 1 of them? I have.

Morag

pickarooney wrote: »

What would a good ad for crisps look like?

It would show the crisps to start with.