New viral Heineken ad is NOT Politically Correct.

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

Heineken in Ireland tastes like pi$$ anyway.

Ireland is the only country in the world (I believe) where Heineken is sold at 4.3% vol, everywhere else it's 5% vol and tastes decent enough.

Why? is it something to do with the 'champagne' tax? I don't know, but they can F**k right off with their 4.3% Pi$$

Really? First time I tried it was in the Netherlands, and it was pretty tasteless stuff there as well.

seamus wrote: »

My issue is that I don't believe the six people involved aren't actors and the whole thing is scripted. Or, they've each been given a brief and been told to improvise around that brief.

So it seems nice, but loses everything when you realise they're just doing what they've been paid to do.

Can't understand this thinking. Look around Boards for a few hours and you could pick out maybe fifty pairs of posters with opposing opinions. Set them up, pay them a few quid, and let them do their thing. Out of the fifty pairs, you're bound to get three or four who take the "have a beer and a chat" option, and you just don't need to bother showing the other 47.

It doesn't have to be a set-up, it just has to be selective.

murpho999 wrote: »

Only difference between Ireland and NL is that they give you bigger foamy head in NL.

and it's 5% in Holland.

seamus wrote: »

Yeah, but that's the same thing. They're going for the "this is an authentic, real-world situation, just give people a teamwork challenge and a beer and they'll work it out."

But it's not. Whether it's completely staged, or the "best" outcomes are selectively shown, it's fake. It's not an experiment at all, just an ad.

Realistically the guys producing the ad know that it's cheaper to hire six actors to run through this rather than bring in a tonne of people and edit hours and hours of footage to find the best outcomes. So I'd be surprised if they did run through this whole scenario fifty times.

Paying six actors and making sure they don't spill the beans is probably a lot costlier than getting a hundred fame-hungry ordinary people— let's be honest, plenty of people would do it for a case of beers and the opportunity to be on the telly.

Fifty was a random number. You might not have to get fifty pairs to get three who worked out: between the knowledge that they were on TV being judged and the fact that they've engaged with the other person, you might only need ten to get three pairs who would at least want to be seen to stay for the drink.

For me, if there's an element of inauthenticity, it's probably there: just because they sit and stay for the drink, it doesn't mean their opinions have changed, or are changing, or will ever change. The social pressure of knowing they'll be broadcast walking away from someone when the other person was willing to sit is pretty huge.

Unobserved, they might react very differently.