Minimum alcohol pricing is nigh

machaseh · 13-11-2019 3:41pm

Suckit wrote: »

I think that is part of it. Trying to get rid of that image, but I am also pretty sure that they are going the wrong way about it.

Ireland shouldnt focus on getting rid of the image of a drinking country. It should instead focus on promoting its image regarding other things. And when you think about it what does ireland have going for it other than drinking?

The cuisine is terrible
Hardly anybody speaks the Irish language
The weather is terrible
You'd definitely not visit for the historical city centers because they are nothing compared to what you'd find in continental europe
It has great traditional sports but most people outside of Ireland don't even know what GAA or hurling is.

The main thing it'd have going for it would be the traditional music and the nice nature, and more could be done to promote ireland based on those things rather than drinking.

Subsidize REAL trad music playing in all pubs, for example, and then I dont mean the kind of fake one you find in Temple Bar, but I mean the kind you'd find in the villages such as Clifden and also in Galway and the like.

And improve access to the beautiful nature sites that Ireland has. Not just by car, but especially by greatly improving bike infrastructure.

machaseh · 13-11-2019 3:42pm

For example I took me mate to Inisheer island, we only saw one old man speaking irish with another old woman. All the younger folks (behind the bar in the pub etc.) were having their banter in normal English.

Suckit · 13-11-2019 3:50pm

I agree.
If some politicians are to be believed, they are also coming under pressure from groups similar to and including AA.
So they have dismissed the thousands of others that don't have issues with alcohol and because we haven't (yet) put pressure on them, they will fire ahead with this nonsense.
I honestly do not see what putting a minimum price on alcohol is expected to achieve.

Richard Hillman · 13-11-2019 3:58pm

It is a cultural genocide. Drinking is a large part of our culture. They continue to curtail our drinking activities and it will only get worse.

Essentially what they want is for us to be is non drinkers, be vegetarian, cycle everywhere, partake in weekly 5k fun runs, wear flannel, wear glasses, grow beards, and talk about our feeling a lot.

Jog on, lads. Its Ireland, not an American West Coast college campus.

Thelonious Monk · 13-11-2019 4:09pm

We don't say "jog on" in Ireland

Reputable Rog · 13-11-2019 7:58pm

Reputable Rog wrote: »

What happens if a new school opens within 200 metres of an established alcohol hoarding? I remember in Limerick there was a massive Murphys illuminated sign on the Ballysimon Road, would that sign have to come down if a new school opened within 200 metres?

https://amp.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/end-of-an-era-as-macrooms-iconic-mural-falls-foul-of-alcohol-law-963622.html

And so it begins, cultural vandalism.

randomname2005 · 13-11-2019 11:21pm

Reputable Rog wrote: »

https://amp.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/end-of-an-era-as-macrooms-iconic-mural-falls-foul-of-alcohol-law-963622.html

And so it begins, cultural vandalism.

Perhaps this is going ot apologies mods if it is deemed so, but the quotes at the end of the article make me so angry. They talk about first drinks being given by parents and relatives as a bad thing, surely it is better this than chugging bottles of vodka down the field.
Also, this talk of alcohol advertising and cost is crap. Go to many European countries where alcohol is cheap and they have few of the problems we have. I lived in a southern European country for a few years, and even during big festivals there would be little if any problems. People would drink but not get stupid drunk. It was frowned upon to get sick or be a d1ck when drunk, not encouraged. We could probably do more to curb alcohol abuse by dealing with drunks, throwing them in the drunk tank for a night, and fining them and discouraging this behavior.
We changed societies attitude to drink driving, we can do the same with excessive drinking

elperello · 13-11-2019 11:30pm

This advertising thing has sort of taken me unawares.
I've been posting on this thread for some years but concentrated on the nonsense that is MUP.
I must admit I took my eye off the ball with regard to the advertising issues.

Can anyone point to any empirical evidence to stand up the 200m from schools ban?
Why 200m? Will kids not a affected by hoardings they pass by 300m from the school?

Suckit · 13-11-2019 11:32pm

It makes it look like they're doing something useful.

elperello · 14-11-2019 12:04am

machaseh wrote: »

Ireland shouldnt focus on getting rid of the image of a drinking country. It should instead focus on promoting its image regarding other things. And when you think about it what does ireland have going for it other than drinking?

The cuisine is terrible
Hardly anybody speaks the Irish language
The weather is terrible
You'd definitely not visit for the historical city centers because they are nothing compared to what you'd find in continental europe
It has great traditional sports but most people outside of Ireland don't even know what GAA or hurling is.

The main thing it'd have going for it would be the traditional music and the nice nature, and more could be done to promote ireland based on those things rather than drinking.

Subsidize REAL trad music playing in all pubs, for example, and then I dont mean the kind of fake one you find in Temple Bar, but I mean the kind you'd find in the villages such as Clifden and also in Galway and the like.

And improve access to the beautiful nature sites that Ireland has. Not just by car, but especially by greatly improving bike infrastructure.

You make some interesting points but there's nothing wrong with a few drinks.

This guy Austin Allsup https://www.bandsintown.com/a/370086-austin-allsup
was on with Miriam O'Callaghan yesterday publicising his bands gig in the Texas Red Dirt Pub Crawl Tour. He was talking about being a bit hungover and drinking and you could almost sense the dismay in the studio. I'm not giving out about Miriam but the whole scene has changed now. Anything that promotes drink is dangerous territory in the media.

I've seen bands like this playing in the US and the carry on makes sessions here look like a garden party.

I'm not uncritically promoting heavy drinking which is obviously bad for you but there are worse things that can befall young people. We have become too po faced and given too much ground to the neo prohibitionists. We are in danger of forgetting how to have the crack.

Footnote:Austin Allsup's dad Tommy Allsup played guitar with Buddy Holly. He flipped a coin with Ritchie Valens to determine who would travel on the plane. He lost and ended up on the bus and you know the rest.

Suckit · 14-11-2019 12:47am

It's the media that needs to change.

14-11-2019 12:53pm

elperello wrote: »

You make some interesting points but there's nothing wrong with a few drinks.

This guy Austin Allsup https://www.bandsintown.com/a/370086-austin-allsup
was on with Miriam O'Callaghan yesterday publicising his bands gig in the Texas Red Dirt Pub Crawl Tour. He was talking about being a bit hungover and drinking and you could almost sense the dismay in the studio. I'm not giving out about Miriam but the whole scene has changed now. Anything that promotes drink is dangerous territory in the media.

I've seen bands like this playing in the US and the carry on makes sessions here look like a garden party.

I'm not uncritically promoting heavy drinking which is obviously bad for you but there are worse things that can befall young people. We have become too po faced and given too much ground to the neo prohibitionists. We are in danger of forgetting how to have the crack.

Footnote:Austin Allsup's dad Tommy Allsup played guitar with Buddy Holly. He flipped a coin with Ritchie Valens to determine who would travel on the plane. He lost and ended up on the bus and you know the rest.

I lived in East-Central Europe for a few years(where they can really drink), and was working for a software company. The normal practice was to go out to a restaurant for lunch( the three course lunch menu was about 2 euros) and most people had a pint with lunch. Over arrives HR woman from the US who observed this practice and cue meetings and discussions and then a company wide memo reminding that the company was an alcohol free place and the practice of having a beer with lunch went against company policy etc etc.

One guy went to the doctor complaining of regular indigestion after lunch. Ever since the company effectively banned him from having a beer with lunch he was getting heartburn and discomfort, so the Czech doctor wrote him a letter insisting he should be allowed have a beer with lunch for medical reasons.

Over there, they don't so much have a drink culture but they have a beer culture. You can buy beer in the gym, in the cinema, on the bus to Prague, in McDonalds and pubs and licensed premises can(and many do) open 24 hours a day 365 days of the year.

I have to say the creeping in of this oppressive attitude towards alcohol very uncomfortable. Also to an extent, the sudden change of attitude towards vaping(whole different topic I know, but its a similar trial by media bias)

He was talking about being a bit hungover and drinking and you could almost sense the dismay in the studio.

I didn't hear it but I well believe it.

mjv2ydratu679c · 14-11-2019 12:55pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I lived in East-Central Europe for a few years(where they can really drink), and was working for a software company. The normal practice was to go out to a restaurant for lunch( the three course lunch menu was about 2 euros) and most people had a pint with lunch. Over arrives HR woman from the US who observed this practice and cue meetings and discussions and then a company wide memo reminding that the company was an alcohol free place and the practice of having a beer with lunch went against company policy etc etc.

One guy went to the doctor complaining of regular indigestion after lunch. Ever since the company effectively banned him from having a beer with lunch he was getting heartburn and discomfort, so the Czech doctor wrote him a letter insisting he should be allowed have a beer with lunch for medical reasons.

Over there, they don't so much have a drink culture but they have a beer culture. You can buy beer in the gym, in the cinema, on the bus to Prague, in McDonalds and pubs and licensed premises can(and many do) open 24 hours a day 365 days of the year.

I have to say the creeping in of this oppressive attitude towards alcohol very uncomfortable. Also to an extent, the sudden change of attitude towards vaping(whole different topic I know, but its a similar trial by media bias)

I didn't hear it but I well believe it.

that place sounds like heaven, where was that?

Thelonious Monk · 14-11-2019 1:00pm

Valentin Itchy Spaceship wrote: »

that place sounds like heaven, where was that?

I bet it's Brno and he worked for IBM

14-11-2019 1:03pm

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

I bet it's Brno and he worked for IBM

Right and wrong. Brno but not IBM.

Thelonious Monk · 14-11-2019 1:08pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Right and wrong. Brno but not IBM.

I nearly took a job there with them once

14-11-2019 1:13pm

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

I nearly took a job there with them once

My ex worked there for 4 years and loved it. I heard a few horror stories though from others.

LineOfBeauty · 14-11-2019 1:19pm

Upping drinking prices never works. All it means is that the regular Irish citizen is every bit as hungover on a Sunday morning but even more poor than they already are.

Fr Tod Umptious · 14-11-2019 2:01pm

elperello wrote: »

This advertising thing has sort of taken me unawares.
I've been posting on this thread for some years but concentrated on the nonsense that is MUP.
I must admit I took my eye off the ball with regard to the advertising issues.

Can anyone point to any empirical evidence to stand up the 200m from schools ban?
Why 200m? Will kids not a affected by hoardings they pass by 300m from the school?

It's all about the long term

Take the everydsy prevalence of alcohol away, ie. advertising, and people become less aware of it and thus less likely to consume it.

Take smoking for example.
Would a teenager today from a non-smoking household be able to name as many cigarette brands as a teenager from a non smoking household could in 1983.

I doubt it.
Because a teenager today if far less exposed to cigarette branding than they were in 1983.

Some will claim advertising does not work, if that's the case why do drinks companies spend billions on it.

Fr Tod Umptious · 14-11-2019 2:12pm

Reputable Rog wrote: »

https://amp.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/end-of-an-era-as-macrooms-iconic-mural-falls-foul-of-alcohol-law-963622.html

And so it begins, cultural vandalism.

It's commercialism not culture.

Don't get the two confused like people did for Arthur's Day.

Doctor Jimbob · 14-11-2019 3:07pm

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

It's all about the long term

Take the everydsy prevalence of alcohol away, ie. advertising, and people become less aware of it and thus less likely to consume it.

Take smoking for example.
Would a teenager today from a non-smoking household be able to name as many cigarette brands as a teenager from a non smoking household could in 1983.

I doubt it.
Because a teenager today if far less exposed to cigarette branding than they were in 1983.

Some will claim advertising does not work, if that's the case why do drinks companies spend billions on it.

That's proof that advertising influences people to choose certain brands over others, not that it makes them start drinking/smoking in the first place.

Fr Tod Umptious · 14-11-2019 4:01pm

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

That's proof that advertising influences people to choose certain brands over others, not that it makes them start drinking/smoking in the first place.

That's somewhat true but the presence and prevalence of alcohol advertising, regardless of brand, is going to attract new people to alcohol.

Anyone who laments the loss of alcohol advertising, especially around places kids gather, is a fcking moron in my eyes.

14-11-2019 4:25pm

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Anyone who laments the loss of alcohol advertising, especially around places kids gather, is a fcking moron in my eyes.

Charming.

Well anyone who accepts what the government spouts in the name of protecting our children from the daemon drink is a moron in mine.

elperello · 14-11-2019 7:17pm

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

It's all about the long term

Take the everydsy prevalence of alcohol away, ie. advertising, and people become less aware of it and thus less likely to consume it.

Take smoking for example.
Would a teenager today from a non-smoking household be able to name as many cigarette brands as a teenager from a non smoking household could in 1983.

I doubt it.
Because a teenager today if far less exposed to cigarette branding than they were in 1983.

Some will claim advertising does not work, if that's the case why do drinks companies spend billions on it.

Thanks for the reply but I was really looking for more information about the banning of advertising up to 200m from schools. I find it hard to believe that children can be influenced by a hoarding if it is inside the 200m limit but not by one say 250m away.

The argument about branding is interesting.
As I recall my childhood I remember the bold kids who smoked or drank and they didn't care about brands. It was the excitement or devilment of doing something forbidden and the desire to appear tough to the rest of us that drove them.

Ultimately the most effective method of preventing underage drinking is diligent and pro-active parenting. The second is policing and enforcement of the raft of legislation already in place.

Fr Tod Umptious · 14-11-2019 8:24pm

elperello wrote: »

Thanks for the reply but I was really looking for more information about the banning of advertising up to 200m from schools. I find it hard to believe that children can be influenced by a hoarding if it is inside the 200m limit but not by one say 250m away.

The argument about branding is interesting.
As I recall my childhood I remember the bold kids who smoked or drank and they didn't care about brands. It was the excitement or devilment of doing something forbidden and the desire to appear tough to the rest of us that drove them.

Ultimately the most effective method of preventing underage drinking is diligent and pro-active parenting. The second is policing and enforcement of the raft of legislation already in place.

Of course the kids don't care about the brand, but they certainly are aware of the brands.

Take smoking again.
As a kid I knew exactly what a pack of Major, Carrols, Benson etc looked like because I had seen them in countless newspapers, magazines, billboards and shops.

So when I tried smoking at the age of about 13 I knew that I could walk into a shop and ask for "10 Major" because I knew that Major was a popular cigarette brand.

Now I had no idea about the difference between Major and Rothmans and not did I care, but I knew what to ask for when I went into that shop.

Fast forward to now.
Do you think kids (from non smoking households) know what the popular cigarette brands out there are?
Do you think they would be as confident as I was about going into a shop and asking for a pack of cigarettes without any real idea about how to ask for them ?

Branding is huge.

Just look at Guinness and the way they appropriate themselves on everything to do with rugby.

Don't you think that Guinness know full well that there are kids watching rugby that will become familiar with the Guinness brand and know about it when they get around to start drinking themselves ?

I really can't understand any adult who would have an issue with curtailing the level of advertising by drinks companies.
If you are a drinker you already know where to get it, how much it costs and what you like and don't like.
Less advertising is no skin off your nose.

elperello · 14-11-2019 9:40pm

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Of course the kids don't care about the brand, but they certainly are aware of the brands.

Take smoking again.
As a kid I knew exactly what a pack of Major, Carrols, Benson etc looked like because I had seen them in countless newspapers, magazines, billboards and shops.

So when I tried smoking at the age of about 13 I knew that I could walk into a shop and ask for "10 Major" because I knew that Major was a popular cigarette brand.

Now I had no idea about the difference between Major and Rothmans and not did I care, but I knew what to ask for when I went into that shop.

Fast forward to now.
Do you think kids (from non smoking households) know what the popular cigarette brands out there are?
Do you think they would be as confident as I was about going into a shop and asking for a pack of cigarettes without any real idea about how to ask for them ?

Branding is huge.

Just look at Guinness and the way they appropriate themselves on everything to do with rugby.

Don't you think that Guinness know full well that there are kids watching rugby that will become familiar with the Guinness brand and know about it when they get around to start drinking themselves ?

I really can't understand any adult who would have an issue with curtailing the level of advertising by drinks companies.
If you are a drinker you already know where to get it, how much it costs and what you like and don't like.
Less advertising is no skin off your nose.

Perhaps we could skip the smoking issue because I don't think there is much of an argument between us about it. Smoking is bad for you and there is no case to be made for children smoking.

I don't doubt that drink companies want to promote awareness of their products but I don't think preventing them from doing so will help. As I said in a previous post I believe both parental responsibility and enforcement of existing laws is the way to go.

As regards curtailing drink advertising I think you have put your finger on why I took little notice until now of the restrictions in the Bill.

Foolishly I did indeed think it was "no skin off my nose" but seeing the painting out of the image of a pint in Cork has changed my view. The type of fundamentalist approach being adopted by the Government disturbs me.

beggars_bush · 14-11-2019 9:42pm

Alcohol is a drug and needs to be regulated, along with the advertising and sales

There are also estimated to be 1 million teetotallers in Ireland, so not everyone is going out getting sloshed every weekend

elperello · 14-11-2019 10:09pm

beggars_bush wrote: »

Alcohol is a drug and needs to be regulated, along with the advertising and sales

There are also estimated to be 1 million teetotallers in Ireland, so not everyone is going out getting sloshed every weekend

Indeed, technically you are correct about alcohol and it is indeed regulated.However any legislation which attempts to regulate drink needs to have regard to it's place in our culture and history.

I have no argument whatsoever with anyone who decides not to drink nor do I hold any brief for those who are "going out getting sloshed every weekend".

Both options are open to adults but personally I wouldn't recommend either.

Fr Tod Umptious · 14-11-2019 10:15pm

elperello wrote: »

Perhaps we could skip the smoking issue because I don't think there is much of an argument between us about it. Smoking is bad for you and there is no case to be made for children smoking.

I don't doubt that drink companies want to promote awareness of their products but I don't think preventing them from doing so will help. As I said in a previous post I believe both parental responsibility and enforcement of existing laws is the way to go.

As regards curtailing drink advertising I think you have put your finger on why I took little notice until now of the restrictions in the Bill.

Foolishly I did indeed think it was "no skin off my nose" but seeing the painting out of the image of a pint in Cork has changed my view. The type of fundamentalist approach being adopted by the Government disturbs me.

Seriously ?
You thought the removal of a admittedly unorthodox piece of advertising to be a fundamentalist approach ?

What are you on about ?

It was a commercial entity, not something historic or sacred, there will probably be something in it's place before too long, the building owner has already said he is open to offers.

This is not ISIS tearing down ancient building in Syria for Christ sake

Get real.

elperello · 14-11-2019 10:27pm

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Seriously ?
You thought the removal of a admittedly unorthodox piece of advertising to be a fundamentalist approach ?

What are you on about ?

It was a commercial entity, not something historic or sacred, there will probably be something in it's place before too long, the building owner has already said he is open to offers.

This is not ISIS tearing down ancient building in Syria for Christ sake

Get real.

Yes I felt that the removal of what was a piece of public art because it included an image of a pint was quite extreme.

I didn't say it was historic or sacred and certainly didn't draw any comparison with the ISIS.

Please try to accept my bona fides without indulging in hyperbole.

Fr Tod Umptious · 14-11-2019 10:31pm

elperello wrote: »

Yes I felt that the removal of what was a piece of public art because it included an image of a pint was quite extreme.

I didn't say it was historic or sacred and certainly didn't draw any comparison with the ISIS.

Please try to accept my bona fides without indulging in hyperbole.

It was not just a picture of a pint, it was a pint of particular brand of drink , it had "Murphy's" written across the glass.

It was not public art, it was advertising.

MacroomMuralBefore121119_large.jpg?width=600&s=bn-963667

MacroomMuralBefore121119_large.jpg?width=600&s=bn-963667

elperello · 14-11-2019 10:37pm

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

It was not just a picture of a pint, it was a pint of particular brand of drink , it had "Murphy's" written across the glass.

It was not public art, it was advertising.

It's definitely a picture of a pint to me.

A mural painted by two local artists is public art by any definition.

Are you suggesting that the mural without the brand would be less damaging to schoolchildren?

listermint · 14-11-2019 10:43pm

beggars_bush wrote: »

Alcohol is a drug and needs to be regulated, along with the advertising and sales

There are also estimated to be 1 million teetotallers in Ireland, so not everyone is going out getting sloshed every weekend

Are the all as obnoxious as some of the anti alcohol posters in here ?
Painful to listen to and void of any useful facts.

Continually disregarding the fact that alcohol consumption is down and the youth simply are less and less interested as each year goes by.

But sure look. Mad as a bag of spanners.

listermint · 14-11-2019 10:44pm

The posters. Not the youth

Leroy42 · 14-11-2019 10:47pm

listermint wrote: »

Are the all as obnoxious as some of the anti alcohol posters in here ?
Painful to listen to and void of any useful facts.

Continually disregarding the fact that alcohol consumption is down and the youth simply are less and less interested as each year goes by.

But sure look. Mad as a bag of spanners.

So the problems being called up by many posters here are clearly not. The country, as you say yourself, is moving away from alcohol and surely it's right that the government try to enable society achieve its desire in this respect.

Fr Tod Umptious · 14-11-2019 10:49pm

elperello wrote: »

It's definitely a picture of a pint to me.

A mural painted by two local artists is public art by any definition.

Are you suggesting that the mural without the brand would be less damaging to schoolchildren?

The mural is a piece of advertising because the brand owner is actually paying the building owner to have it there

Regardless of who painted it it's a piece of advertising not a piece of public art.

I have passed it many times, it's presence or otherwise does not bother me.

I have not read the legislation so I don't know if it allows unbranded "advertising"(oxymoron I know) or not.

A unbranded image would of course not have the same subliminal effect on children as a branded one would have but it would still be promoting alcohol so yea it would be equally damaging

Fr Tod Umptious · 14-11-2019 10:51pm

listermint wrote: »

Are the all as obnoxious as some of the anti alcohol posters in here ?
Painful to listen to and void of any useful facts.

Continually disregarding the fact that alcohol consumption is down and the youth simply are less and less interested as each year goes by.

But sure look. Mad as a bag of spanners.

Which is good, so why not continue that trend by reducing advertising.

What exactly is peoples problem with reduced advertising ?

hatrickpatrick · 14-11-2019 11:01pm

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Which is good, so why not continue that trend by reducing advertising.

What exactly is peoples problem with reduced advertising ?

Not all of us agree that social engineering is a good thing. Your posts are predicated on the idea that the government should be trying to push people towards one kind of lifestyle or another instead of leaving people alone to make their own life choices. Not everyone agrees with that and many of us are diametrically opposed to it.

Leroy42 · 14-11-2019 11:05pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Not all of us agree that social engineering is a good thing. Your posts are predicated on the idea that the government should be trying to push people towards one kind of lifestyle or another instead of leaving people alone to make their own life choices. Not everyone agrees with that and many of us are diametrically opposed to it.

You have got it confused. The government is trying to stop commercial entities from pushing people into choosing their product.

The government are not stopping anybody (of legal age) from drinking. We are still free to make whatever choices we want, but less influenced by those looking solely to profit.

cj maxx · 14-11-2019 11:05pm

beggars_bush wrote: »

Alcohol is a drug and needs to be regulated, along with the advertising and sales

There are also estimated to be 1 million teetotallers in Ireland, so not everyone is going out getting sloshed every weekend

True. And any advertising limits such as before, after and during soccer , rugby matches when teens are watching should be welcomed.
Minimum pricing however is not the way to go. Anyone around the border can testify that Good Friday was the best piss up of the year . And anyone who has gone shopping in late November up to Christmas to the likes of newry can testify seeing all D and W reg vans loading up with booze because of price. Minimum pricing will just make it an all year round trip and encourage smuggling gangs

Fr Tod Umptious · 14-11-2019 11:08pm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Not all of us agree that social engineering is a good thing. Your posts are predicated on the idea that the government should be trying to push people towards one kind of lifestyle or another instead of leaving people alone to make their own life choices. Not everyone agrees with that and many of us are diametrically opposed to it.

Yea I agree that there are certain libertarian types out there you don't like government restrictions

But alcohol is known to be a problem, it's a fact that it causes health problems, emotional problems, domestic violence problems, etc etc.

So why not curtail the visibility of it in areas with high density of children, e,g, schools.

We already restrict where and when and too whom it can be sold.

In your opinion should those restrictions be removed also ?

elperello · 14-11-2019 11:09pm

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

The mural is a piece of advertising because the brand owner is actually paying the building owner to have it there

Regardless of who painted it it's a piece of advertising not a piece of public art.

I have passed it many times, it's presence or otherwise does not bother me.

I have not read the legislation so I don't know if it allows unbranded "advertising"(oxymoron I know) or not.

A unbranded image would of course not have the same subliminal effect on children as a branded one would have but it would still be promoting alcohol so yea it would be equally damaging

I would hold that the fact that it was painted by two local artists and was an expression of their imagination qualifies it as art.

Have a read - http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2018/act/24/section/14/enacted/en/html#sec14

Bizarrely if it was actually on a pub it would be legal. As we know our legislators don't want to upset the VFI or LVA.

An unbranded image could well be legal.

In any case it is very unlikely that a pint of black porter is an appealing image to underage drinkers. A can of whatever they can get behind a bush is more likely in my experience

odyssey06 · 14-11-2019 11:37pm

I have been drenched in Guinness advertising since forever. Soaked.
Even had a few Guinnesses on Arthurs Day...
And yet... I hardly ever touch the stuff.
Nothing to do with advertising or price.

Leroy42 · 14-11-2019 11:57pm

odyssey06 wrote: »

I have been drenched in Guinness advertising since forever. Soaked.
Even had a few Guinnesses on Arthurs Day...
And yet... I hardly ever touch the stuff.
Nothing to do with advertising or price.

Let's see. Do we take your anecdote as proof or look to the millions spent on advertising each year as proof.

Even you agree that you succumb to advertising by changing from your usual to Guiness on the brand created Arthur's day.

It has everything to do with advertising, unless you want us to believe you happened upon Arthur's day by yourself

Doctor Jimbob · 15-11-2019 12:39am

Leroy42 wrote: »

You have got it confused. The government is trying to stop commercial entities from pushing people into choosing their product.

The government are not stopping anybody (of legal age) from drinking. We are still free to make whatever choices we want, but less influenced by those looking solely to profit.

If commercial entities pushing people into choosing their product is a bad thing, do you think all advertising should be banned? If you do, fair enough.

I think it's unlikely that advertising has any significant effect on making people drink in the first place. I started drinking cheap cider in fields with my mates. In college I drank whatever lager happened to be cheap or on offer. I think most people are in the same boat.

Increasing the price would have more of an effect, but thats just going to drive people to a)illegal sources, as has happened with cigarettes or b)brewing their own.

As others have said, young people are drinking less and less anyway. Do we really need government intervention here? If we do, I think education is surely a better option than lazy options like increasing price or banning advertising. I know I've cut down my drinking since reading up on it, I'm sure plenty others would do the same.

cj maxx · 15-11-2019 1:01am

Can anyone post a photo of this art/ad. I gather it someone with a pint of stout ?

Hotblack Desiato · 15-11-2019 2:27am

The most effective anti-tobacco and anti-alcohol measure ever introduced for the "young people of Ireland" (patronising term or what) was the invention of prepaid mobile phone credit.

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Now I had no idea about the difference between Major and Rothmans and not did I care, but I knew what to ask for when I went into that shop.

I knew what to ask for aged 9 because my teacher told me to get him twenty Carroll's No.1 in the shop :eek: I still knew it was a stupid thing to smoke and I never did. Oh and the shop gave them to me no questions asked.

Hotblack Desiato · 15-11-2019 2:28am

Deleted User wrote: »

Charming.

Well anyone who accepts what the government spouts in the name of protecting our children from the daemon drink is a moron in mine.

Especially when what they're really up to is trying to look after their publican friends (and many of them are publicans themselves.)

Pinch Flat · 15-11-2019 3:31am

Was up north last weekend. Jaysus we do get shafted here for booze

15-11-2019 4:17am

I disagree, the "drinking problems" are myths from the government.

Raising the price of alcohol will do **** all.

There are many countries that have far cheaper drink than us that drink less. It's a cultural issue.

Minimum alcohol pricing is nigh

Comments