Guiness Advert potentially "Banned" under new drink legislation

Luckycharms_74

WTF :eek:. The world is gone mad

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/christmas-guinness-ad-will-be-banned-under-new-drink-laws-says-lobby-group-36155444.html

wrote:

A LOBBY group for the drinks industry has produced an edited video of a popular Guinness ad to show the impact proposed new laws will have on alcohol advertising.
The Alcohol Beverage Federation of Ireland (ABFI) claim the “iconic” Guinness Christmas advertising will be effectively banned once new legislation set out in the Public Health Alcohol Bill is implemented.
The Guinness advertisement depicting snow covered scenes of Ireland at Christmas has been a staple of festive advertising in recent years.

New legislation would force advertisers to remove any scenes showing people, animals or pubs, according to the ABFI.

ABFI director Patricia Callan said the bill is “well intentioned” but will have “devastating consequences” for the drinks industry in Ireland.

“The bill will make it extremely difficult for all drinks companies to advertise their products - and is particularly harmful for small producers and new entrants who have invested heavily in breweries and distilleries across Ireland – and have less brand awareness,” Ms Callan said.
“This bill will make it extremely difficult to establish new products in Ireland and ultimately harms the drinks industries innovation, export and growth potential.

“The bill will also see the iconic Guinness Christmas ad banned, which for many is a sentimental feature of the festive season,” she added.
The drinks industry has launched an intense lobby campaign to prevent the new laws from restricting alcohol advertising

It's hard to take the Alcohol Lobbyists seriously in this instance ...

Jim Bob Scratcher

Nanny state gone mad

Ted Plain

This law simply aggravates me. It aggravates me greatly.

I feel like that one poor child banned from doing everything their friends are doing by their obsessive, manipulative, over-strict asshole parents.

:mad:

MrMorooka

The video makes a really bad case actually- it shows that the core of the ad, the voiceover that actually advertises the product, is perfectly intact. If you ignore the 'Scene Missing' crap, you could actually edit the ad into a nice, short Christmassy message, that still shows the Gate and the brand name.

El Weirdo

Ted Plain wrote: »

This law simply aggravates me. It aggravates me greatly.

I feel like that one poor child banned from doing everything their friends are doing by their obsessive, manipulative, over-strict asshole parents.

:mad:

I'm going to become a raging alcoholic in spite of them.

That'll show the fuckers!

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

But, does the advertising actually result in more sales anyway?

Atoms for Peace

If it hasn't for those damm Budweiser's frogs I'd have never touched the stuff.

Rumpy Pumpy

The advertising of alcohol should be just banned, along with booze companies sponsoring events.

artanevilla

Rumpy Pumpy wrote: »

The advertising of alcohol should be just banned, along with booze companies sponsoring events.

Why?

castletownman

Hmmm. I betcha those over-sentimental "inspirational" Guinness ads that happen to air during the rugby season won't be black-listed though.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Louie Nervous Kangaroo wrote: »

But, does the advertising actually result in more sales anyway?

Well there wouldn't be much point in running multi million marketing campaigns if they didn't.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

I'd say its a matter of time until alcohol companies can't advertise at all

DEFTLEFTHAND

Deleted User wrote: »

I'd say its a matter of time until alcohol companies can't advertise at all

That's the end goal.

I can see society becoming conservative over the next decades.

Sale of Tobacco will banned outright within the next 15-20 years.

Restrictions on sale of alcohol and government mandated pricing will become a reality sooner.

Almost Puritan.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

wes

artanevilla wrote: »

Why?

I saw we legalize there competition instead......

I can't take the Alcohol industry seriously, there hypocrites who lobby against legalizing marijuana, a drug that is far less harmful, than what they peddle.

Your Face

'Don't forget to turn the lights off"

Prick.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

wes

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yeah, and drink drivers kill a lot more people than people getting high.

Look I don't drink or get high, its not for me, but the Alcohol industry lobbying against the competition is pure hypocrisy. I can't take there complaints seriously, when there happy when prohibition is against there competition.

Allinall

Amazon UK wrote: »

Why is Ireland turning into such a crappy nanny state?

Mainly because it's full of crappy immature children who need minding.

WoollyRedHat

'New legislation would force advertisers to remove any scenes showing people, animals or pubs, according to the ABFI.'

Am I missing something here? People or animals? That's a sizeable chunk of ads gone right there.

Fr Tod Umptious

Well if this legislation is serious about curbing alcohol consumption for the long term betterment of the nation's health and not some attempted helping hand for the pub industry, then advertising restrictions are just one step on that road.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Well there wouldn't be much point in running multi million marketing campaigns if they didn't.

That's my point. How many millions more profit actually arises because a particular advert is shown? Research suggests it's dubious if many adverts actually increase sales.

Allinall

Louie Nervous Kangaroo wrote: »

That's my point. How many millions more profit actually arises because a particular advert is shown? Research suggests it's dubious if many adverts actually increase sales.

The likes of alcohol or any brand advertising is about maintaining and increasing market share.

You can be 100% sure that marketing spends are returning value for the companies.

WoollyRedHat

WoollyRedHat wrote: »

'New legislation would force advertisers to remove any scenes showing people, animals or pubs, according to the ABFI.'

Am I missing something here? People or animals? That's a sizeable chunk of ads gone right there.

Surely it would be 99% of ads ...

murphthesmurf

I'm sick to death of the 99% having to give way for the 1%. If you're a drunk, sort your life out. Why should we all pay the price for the few who don't know when enough is enough. Target them and leave the rest of us the f#*k alone. All this talk of minimum prices on alcohol and banning advertising just because poor John or Bill or whoever has a drink problem. They are not victims. We will all be made to suffer because of their week minds. I don't drink very often at all, I'm not the kind of person eho drinks for the sake of drink. But when I do get a chance to go out or get a bottle of port for in the house why the **** should I pay double because of some fool who is somehow 'a victim of society'.
People need to start taking responsibility for their own actions. What's next? Tobacco I could understand as it was addictive to pretty much everyone who ever smoked it. But alcohol is not, people drink because they want to and its one of the few pleasues we have left, not because we 'need' to or are addicted to it. There will always be the minority of losers who f#&k things up. If it's not alcohol it will be something else, it is their personality. Sort them out, not everyone else. Ban them from buying alcohol. There should be a list circulated to all sellers of alcohol, listing people who are banned from buying it. If you are an alcoholic you get banned from buying it. Get convicted of drunken disorderly, 6 or 12 month ban.

andekwarhola

Alcohol advertising being banned wouldn't bother me half as much as blatant interference like the minimum pricing act.

People also need to stop trotting out the stuff about drunks and health issues re: minimum pricing and other interference. The windfalls that will accrue from minimum pricing won't be going anywhere near the health or addiction services and people will still be getting pissed in pubs.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Allinall

murphthesmurf wrote: »

I'm sick to death of the 99% having to give way for the 1%. If you're a drunk, sort your life out. Why should we all pay the price for the few who don't know when enough is enough. Target them and leave the rest of us the f#*k alone. All this talk of minimum prices on alcohol and banning advertising just because poor John or Bill or whoever has a drink problem. They are not victims. We will all be made to suffer because of their week minds. I don't drink very often at all, I'm not the kind of person eho drinks for the sake of drink. But when I do get a chance to go out or get a bottle of port for in the house why the **** should I pay double because of some fool who is somehow 'a victim of society'.
People need to start taking responsibility for their own actions. What's next? Tobacco I could understand as it was addictive to pretty much everyone who ever smoked it. But alcohol is not, people drink because they want to and its one of the few pleasues we have left, not because we 'need' to or are addicted to it. There will always be the minority of losers who f#&k things up. If it's not alcohol it will be something else, it is their personality. Sort them out, not everyone else. Ban them from buying alcohol. There should be a list circulated to all sellers of alcohol, listing people who are banned from buying it. If you are an alcoholic you get banned from buying it. Get convicted of drunken disorderly, 6 or 12 month ban.

How is banning or curtailing advertising
"Paying the price"?

I'm curious.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

murphthesmurf

Allinall wrote: »

How is banning or curtailing advertising
"Paying the price"?

I'm curious.

I'm refering more to the minimum pricing that will most likely also be included.
Have to agree with the alcohol lobbyists concerning new and up starting breweries. Banning advertising wont make us all forget about Carlsberg, Guiness, Bulmers etc. But it will mean we'll never hear about any new breweries. I love proper craft cider, not the sugar loaded p1ss they sell in most places. These smaller cider brewers and the like will never get a chance to get in the market dominated by the brands we all know so well.

Dj Stiggie

I agree with a previous poster in that they took a bad example. I don't think Heineken suffered much in France when they had to call it the H Cup, but indie brewers and distilleries will suffer. Iceland used to have a big problem for their craft brewers because no alcohol advertising is allowed there.

Slightly off point, but Carlsberg lobbied the Danish government to ban alcohol being associated with any sporting activities in advertising. Then they launched a soda called Carlsberg Sport. Now several sports teams are sponsored by Carlsberg Sport and they feature youth teams in their ads like AIB do. And you'll barely see the drink anywhere in Denmark. Genius move, but horribly manipulative.

Fr Tod Umptious

murphthesmurf wrote: »

I'm refering more to the minimum pricing that will most likely also be included.
Have to agree with the alcohol lobbyists concerning new and up starting breweries. Banning advertising wont make us all forget about Carlsberg, Guiness, Bulmers etc. But it will mean we'll never hear about any new breweries. I love proper craft cider, not the sugar loaded p1ss they sell in most places. These smaller cider brewers and the like will never get a chance to get in the market dominated by the brands we all know so well.

I've never seen an ad for a micro brewery on national TV at prime time, or any other time for that matter.

Dj Stiggie

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

[/b]

I've never seen an ad for a micro brewery on national TV at prime time, or any other time for that matter.

But this could have an effect on potential festivals, etc. advertising.

blueser

Your Face wrote: »

'Don't forget to turn the lights off"

Prick.

Care to elaborate on that comment?

elperello

andekwarhola wrote: »

Alcohol advertising being banned wouldn't bother me half as much as blatant interference like the minimum pricing act.

People also need to stop trotting out the stuff about drunks and health issues re: minimum pricing and other interference. The windfalls that will accrue from minimum pricing won't be going anywhere near the health or addiction services and people will still be getting pissed in pubs.

Was watching tv3 last night , Stephen Donnelly said to Ivan Yates that it would be right for him to pay 30e rather than 20e for his case of beer because of the costs to society of alcohol. Alan Kelly chipped in to say he would like to see us drinking ina controlled environment and he wanted pub and off sales prices to move closer together. With MUPpets like these in the dail we are well and truly goosed!

Your Face

blueser wrote: »

Care to elaborate on that comment?

Care to watch the ads in question?

Allinall

Your Face wrote: »

Care to watch the ads in question?

I've seen the ad numerous times and have no idea what you're ****ing on about.

I, too would like elaboration.

IvySlayer

Or it could be a genius plan of other alcohol companies to not have to spend money on TV advertising..

blueser

Your Face wrote: »

Care to watch the ads in question?

"Ads" (plural)? Isn't that line only in one ad (that I'm aware of)? And yes; I've watched the ad, thanks. Countless times. I look forward to seeing it every christmas. And yes, I'm being serious. Now; if you don't mind actually answering my question. Why does saying "don't forget to turn off the lights" make someone a prick? I'm curious.

Rigor Mortis

murphthesmurf wrote: »

I'm refering more to the minimum pricing that will most likely also be included.
Have to agree with the alcohol lobbyists concerning new and up starting breweries. Banning advertising wont make us all forget about Carlsberg, Guiness, Bulmers etc. But it will mean we'll never hear about any new breweries. I love proper craft cider, not the sugar loaded p1ss they sell in most places. These smaller cider brewers and the like will never get a chance to get in the market dominated by the brands we all know so well.

Most of those breweries don't advertise. They gain their audience through word of mouth and reviews in papers.

Your Face

Allinall wrote: »

I've seen the ad numerous times and have no idea what you're ****ing on about.

I, too would like elaboration.

You didn't hear it because you're the type who watches television through other peoples windows.

Sam Kade

Jim Bob Scratcher wrote: »

Nanny state gone mad

Snowflakery gone mad.

Your Face

blueser wrote: »

"Ads" (plural)? Isn't that line only in one ad (that I'm aware of)? And yes; I've watched the ad, thanks. Countless times. I look forward to seeing it every christmas. And yes, I'm being serious. Now; if you don't mind actually answering my question. Why does saying "don't forget to turn off the lights" make someone a prick? I'm curious.

Are you ok?

Beechwoodspark

Any word about the iconic bud horses galloping through the snow ad

BillyBobBS

Soon enough it will be illegal to have sex, you know just in case you have a good time.

blueser

Your Face wrote: »

Are you ok?

I'm fantastically well, actually. Thanks for asking. Your concern for me is deeply touching. However; enough of the small talk. Back to my question. Why does making that comment make that man a prick? When you're ready, thanks.

Allinall

Your Face wrote: »

You didn't hear it because you're the type who watches television through other peoples windows.

Nuff said.

benjamin d

Allinall wrote: »

How is banning or curtailing advertising
"Paying the price"?

I'm curious.

This will kill the small players in the industry. Diageo waged a vicious campaign against small brewers and distillers for years and years and it's only recently that the tables have started to turn. If you ban advertising, Diageo will muscle every little guy out of the pubs and they'll be left as a monopoly in Ireland yet again. I don't fancy going back to the entirety of my pint selection being Guinness, Smithwicks, Bud, Carlsberg and the token outlier being Heineken. And that will happen.

Your Face

Allinall wrote: »

Nuff said.

I'm sorry you don't have a television and/or are not allowed indoors.