More ads

And more to come ...

Which one?

I'm venturing into the horrible world of web-vertising ... the shameless self promotion of my webcomics. I feel dirty. So to spread the muck around a bit, you can help me choose between these ads ...

Virginity For Sale ... Steaming Hot Virginity For Sale

Why pay for advertising when you can get it for free? The media will happily give you free publicity if you dangle a juicy, sexy, salacious story their way.

So I Need, a struggling TradeMe rival, has a 19-year old woman selling her virginity to the highest bidder. Or is she? Bidding is private, so while the listing says the "highest bidder" will win Unigirl's virginity, she(?) doesn't have to accept any bids.

I Need has only a few hundred 'auctions' active, maybe less as their listing numbers are not accurate. For example, their "personal" section has 11 listings, but when you follow the link it turns out there are only 3, one of which is the "Relationship For Sale" of Unigirl.

No picture is offered for this auction (you can't see the goods upfront) so the NZ Herald article on this sex-filled story used a picture of a woman in fishnet stockings adjusting high heels with the filename 'Parlour_220x147.jpg' ... implying the editor dredged a stock pic from the prostitution file to illustrate the plight of the "cash-strapped Kiwi student". Classy.

The Herald also had a related article link to a 'report' about a 26-year old Auckland Christian, Melanie Clarke, who informs us her virginity is priceless. In Melanie's case a photo was included. Look but don't touch. This is cutting-edge journalism! Who knew there were Christians out there who felt strongly about sex and virginity?

The whole thing has the feel of a stunt. Unigirl was not accepting requests for interviews, which suggests she isn't really serious about promoting the sale. Surely if she wanted top dollar for the goods she'd grab the media spotlight with both hands and shine it directly between her legs?

The stunt gives I Need some much needed publicity. Unfortunately the lack of substantial listings on their site will mean it doesn't get them many new members. I predict Unigirl's 'auction' will disappear without the world discovering if there was a successful sale. The media will go look for sexy stories elsewhere. University fees will continue to rise with all the serious consequences that implies. Serious consequences that just aren't sexy enough to make the papers.

Merry Xmas

... and a happy **hack** new **cough, cough** year **wheeze**.

Two Old Adverts

Two old adverts. One will make you want to go vegetarian. But the other will reveal the horrible dark side of vegetables ...

Jelly Shaped Person

My wife was forced by her work to travel to Auckland recently. I say 'forced' advisedly, as she never goes there of her own free will.

She brought back with her some plane food for our wee girl, who treats the overly packaged treats from the skies with the kind of reverence associated with cargo cults.

"Ooooh, plane food, plane food!"

Today's plane food was a Lolly mix. "Sweet Tooth: Enjoy our Kiwi lolly favourites" it proclaimed. By mix they meant a whole two types of candy; Milk Bottles and Jelly Babies.

Milk bottles, a bottle shaped treat that tastes a little like sweetened off milk, took a bit of explaining.

"When Mummy was a girl milk came in bottles ..."

This was greeted with some degree of skepticism.

However, it was the jelly babies that were the most perplexing of the two mixed candies, as the packet called them a "Jelly Shaped Person".

I'll admit that this moniker does suit me. I am, to a degree, a jelly shaped person. However, the jelly babies cut a rather trimmer figure than I do. It was a realistic body shape. The kind that would not lead to body image problems in the minds of children who were exposed to them. There were not Barbie Shaped Jelly People, or even Fashion Model Shaped Jelly People. They were, in fact, People Shaped Jelly Shaped People.

Or if you prefer, People Shaped Jellies.

The Revenge of the Brine Shrimp

The scariest advert on during cartoon time is one for Sea Monkeys. I remember the old comic book adverts for them in the seventies ... magical palaces underwater, families of sea monkeys playing together, a Utopian society of underwater minions to train to take over the world.

But they were just brine shrimp.

Now they're back. I guess every generation has the right to be disappointed.

Boy Toys -- A Tribute WTF of the month

The Cliterature Blog often has WTF posts, so I thought I'd do one of my own, but it's more a grumpy old man flailing his fists at the world pointlessly.

The cable cartoon channels have become more and more advert heavy of late, and as we let our daughter watch Dora the Explorer in the mornings we are getting bombarded with adverts for kid's toys.

There is a strong gender divide evident in the ads. The 'girl toys' are all about caring, sharing, and "being you". Babies to feed, burp and change. Sick animals to care for. Clothes to colour, wear and share. Oh, and they are all pink. So much pink.

But the toys for boys. Well, obviously they are more about action, mayhem, cars, spaceships and monsters.

There's nothing unexpected about that. Disappointing maybe, but not unexpected.

The part that has me waving my grumpy fists in the air is that a number of these ads contain bad behaviour by the boys in the ads. The two links are examples. They imply that part of the 'fun' of playing with the toy is being obnoxious to others. They make such behaviour not only acceptable, but expected. It becomes part of the play experience ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xyn6gjxWTyI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzBio6VdsOA

Buy this toy and annoy.

It's okay ... we've showed you how to do it. Spray the girl next door with fake dinosaur acid. Taunt your brother after you give him a hot-wheeled beat down.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying these kids are doing anything more than being kids. These things happen. Kids taunt, slime and spray others. My girl does it all the time. In real life the play is not as clear-cut along gender lines as it is in the adverts.

But why are the girls in these ads always the victims?

I know the answer. Sales. Gender differentiation is important in product branding, etc. But I can't help despise this ad-sanction one-sided gender-biased play.

Rule #10827

A recent spate of adverts has led me to a new rule of life ...

Just because you can animate something doesn't mean you should.

Playing Catch with Franz and Hermes

I am officially a grumpy old man. I have been one unofficially for many, many years, but a while back I confirmed my status by making a complaint against a television advert. In my defense, I had been drinking at the time. That, and I'm an anal git. There's an online form, which made it so easy. I'm not allowed to be specific in what my complaint was, but I'd like to share with you my amusement with the process and verdicts.

My complaint was heard. It took place without any input or observation by myself, which is the norm, behind closed doors with an official bringing the complaint. The letter I received informing me about the hearing was polite, but a little lacking in details. The tribunal had not decided to uphold my complaint. I thought that was the end of the matter.

The fun part came many weeks later when I got another letter that revealed there had been an appeal. The appeal focused on a portion of the original decision that had said my complaint was rejected because the advertiser was only using hyperbole. No-one was meant to take what the ad said seriously. The decision referenced a certain energy drink ad that implies you can fly after drinking a can. No-one really believes that, and it is not a breach of the code. My complaint was rejected on similar grounds.

But the appeal decision went on to say that the comparison with the energy drink hyperbole was not valid. My original complaint was correct, the advert was representing something real and doing so in a misleading manner. They had made a mistake in the original decision.

But there was a sting in the tail. The appeal judgment noted that while the initial decision had been incorrect, that was not in itself a valid reason to appeal. They were saying (deep breath); Yes you were right, the ad was in breach, we made a mistake in our first ruling, but you cannot appeal that because the rules do not allow appeals on the grounds that what we decided initially was wrong, which it was, but you can't appeal that, so your complaint is rejected.

It was another triumph of red-taped officialdom.

What was I to do? I re-read a book on Kafka (a simple, short book with illustrations by Robert Crumb) and watched Brazil. Maybe I should get Catch-22 down off the shelf as well?

Midnight Magnesium?

It's cold and flu season in New Zealand, and this year it has the added impact of 'swine flu'. Everyone wansts to avoid the dreaded H1N1. Back in 1918 all you had to do was drink Bovril to avoid the flu. But modern advertisers are doing their best to cash in on public paranoia, with more frequent showings of flu-related products. Panadol now comes in 'Flu Strength'. This year flu vaccinations are being advertised by a crazed karate-kicking guy attempting to fend off a green cloud of flu germs. Household cleaners are even getting into the act, with one claiming it kills flu germs on surfaces.

With all these products out there I wonder why anyone is worried about swine flu. The race for a vaccine seems to be unnecessary ... it's all controllable with these products ... advertisers wouldn't lie to us, would they?

My favourite ad of the moment is the "Afternoon Calcium Made Fun" concept. A mother is walking with her children and she thinks to herself in voice-over that while her kids have had their morning and lunchtime calcium how will she get them their afternoon calcium? So she buys them a calcium enhanced frozen treat.

Afternoon Calcium? By this logic shouldn't she be worried they are not getting any midnight calcium, or their 4am magnesium, or their six minutes past six sodium?

"Wake up, Timmy, and drink this milk."

"But Mum, it's the middle of the night."

"Just drink it, Timmy. I'm not having my kids lacking in calcium. I'm a caring mother. Oh, and here's your 2:30am multi-vitamin ... I'll set the alarm so you know when to take it."

You won't catch me falling for advertising like that. I'm off to enjoy a 100% natural 99% fat-free candy (it sounds so healthy) and then I'll have a big bowl of cereal (it must also be healthy as it's "Ironman food and ironmen are fit and strong"). Then maybe a mug of Bovril, just to be safe.

Delia Smith versus Johnny Rotten

Is it just me or are green concepts being used as protectionist measures? I'm not the biggest fan of free-market philosophies, but when you live in a country like New Zealand you grow up with the struggle to gain entry into overseas markets as a constant backdrop.

As I matured and attempted to gain access to bras and panties my efforts were paralleled by NZ's attempts to sell more butter to the EU (or the EEC as it then known), gain access to all those numerous Chinese consumers, and to get our food exports back into the US after our anti-nuclear stance was punished by trade restrictions. It was an epic uphill struggle for us both, and there were many setbacks. Some markets and bras proved too difficult to unlock. Sometimes we got into bed with the wrong people. We were desperate.

But now a new threat to our overseas market access is emerging ... a green chastity belt, if you will, that may keep us locked out of the choice markets. New Zealand is long, long way from most other countries in the world. We are basically half a world away from our most traditional of markets, the United Kingdom. Anything we wish to sell to the UK must be transported, and this raises the emerald spectre of food miles.

New Zealand lamb was recently praised by Delia Smith, and this landed her in some hot water with the English media (http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/food-wine/2502251/British-cook-upsets-fans-with-NZ-lamb). As one website commentator put it: "In the age of food miles and carbon footprints – not to mention the need for supporting British farming – what on earth is wrong with our own [UK] lamb?". This does not bode well for New Zealand. The concept of food miles originated the the UK, and is well entrenched, and carbon is now public enemy number one. Being associated with these conceptions makes us the bad guys.

John Lydon has also recently appeared in adverts. His promote UK butter in opposition to NZ butter, 'outing' Anchor butter as an imported product. While the ads focus on taste, there is an underlying "buy local" tone (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/farming/2419356/Rotten-campaign-no-threat-to-butter-exports). While the Rotten butter ads never mention carbon footprints or food miles the connection is made by many viewers none-the-less. The implication is clear; buying local butter is the green thing to do ... the moral thing to do.

New Zealand had its own "buy local" advertising campaign, Buy NZ, which was recently curtailed. It was not a very well thought out concept for a trading nation like ours. The buying local mentality does not help us if people in other countries start doing it. It's a bit like a drug dealer telling his neighbours to stay clean, then walking down a couple of blocks to sell his junk. The Buy NZ campaign was a NZ Green party initiative, part of their 2005 election deal with Labour, and cost at least $NZ6.3 million (http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/750552).

The validity of food miles is hotly debated in New Zealand. Indeed, we are devoting rather a lot of effort into research on the matter, and there have been studies that point out that transport is a small amount of the total carbon footprint in food production, and that in New Zealand food production is very efficient as we use less fertilizer, have better production efficiency, transport our foods mainly by sea, and offset our carbon footprints with schemes to plant trees, etc. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_miles). But while the debate and research continues here, overseas the issue has already been decided.

Whatever the truth is, the court of global public opinion has ruled in favour of local produce. Buying local is the right thing to do. It's patriotic. It's green. It's moral. It will save the world. It's simple to understand. It doesn't matter that in reality it may actually be "four four times more energy-efficient for Londoners to buy lamb imported from the other side of the world than to buy it from a producer in their backyard." ('Food That Travels Well', The New York Times, August 6, 2007) Coming to that conclusion requires a lot of calculation, thinking, reasoning, debate, effort, and a lot of prejudice to be overcome.

Delia Smith was not praising NZ lamb for its green credentials, merely its method of production and taste. This was met by criticisms that had a veneer of green moralizing, but underneath seem to have more in common with nationalistic protectionism. The Lydon ads, while mostly innocent and even funny in their execution, managed to tap into those same feelings. But sometimes instead of acting locally you need to think globally, for all meanings of the word global.

Mr Blobby

I'm still carrying a bit of pregnancy weight. Yes, I know ... I'm male ... I didn't have a baby inside me. But I did gain weight during my wife's pregnancy, and it turns out not to be that uncommon. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8063004.stm) I'm pleased that I'm not alone in my pregnatory gluttonacity but I am still a little embarrassed by it.

The reasons aren't to hard to work out ... my wife's diet changed during pregnancy, and so mine did as well. But in my case it wasn't all food related, exercise was less frequent than before ... all kinds of exercise.

Don't get me wrong, though. I had, and still have, the easy part of the whole child-rearing experience. The morning sickness, the wriggling parasite growing inside, kicking, clawing, growing. The hormones that made her suddenly cry at chick flicks ... which at least meant I wasn't crying alone. The feeling that your body is no longer under your own control. A feeling that continues for months afterwards thanks to breast-feeding ... I swear our wee boy sees his mother and thinks, "Cor! Look at the food on that one!"

My part is much less strenuous. Perhaps that's another reason why I'm still carrying that pregnancy weight? So I'm trying to lose some flab ... although not as much as my Wii tells me I should. The Wii Fit game informs me in its perky little voice that I'm dead already. Obese! The greatest of all modern lifestyle sins. Maybe I need to travel back in time ... to the dim distant days of 1934 ... when being 'naturally skinny' was a bad thing. Somehow inventing a time machine seems like an easier task than losing weight.

Swim, my pretties! Swim and conquer the world!

When I was a kid it seemed that every American comic, from Superman to Sad Sack, was teasing me. There were adverts for the coolest things. Toy soldiers that came in lots of one hundred or more, and not just WWII and Romans, but Civil War as well. X-ray specs, Hostess Cupcakes and Twinkies, which were recommended by Superman himself, so you knew they had to be good for you. Oreo Cookies, American Football simulation games, and don't forget Sea Monkeys!

Perhaps it's just as well we could never buy these things in New Zealand. Sea Monkeys, as I later found out, were just brine shrimp. There were not going to build castles under the water, or be trained to be my unholy army capable of taking over the world (mwah ha ha ha!).

When they finally imported Oreos into this country we discovered they only tasted like burnt biscuits--that's biscuits in the English sense of the word. My wife can attest to having eaten a Twinkee when visiting the US ... it wasn't anything to write home about (unlike Ben & Jerry's cookie dough ice cream, which she still craves).

Then there were the seed-selling adverts, where if you sold hundreds of packets of unwanted seeds you could get bikes, tents, telescopes, and other items of unimaginable coolness. I can still see the crude artwork of those pages in my mind's eye ... in many ways the ads were more memorable than the comics they appeared in.

But it was the plastic soldiers I wanted the most. I'd never even see Roman soldiers for sale in New Zealand, and here a comic book was offering to sell you two complete Roman armies! Any comic I owned with that ad was never going to last ... too much drool on the page. Heck, I still want them, even today, but only if they are still $2.25.

Indestructible Light-bulbs

Back when the truly excretable Dances with Wolves hit our screens the world revived an old kid's schoolyard game of dubious ethnic sensitivity -- the 'What Is You Native American Indian Name?' question. Mine is Wrestles with Packaging.

Anything from a new roll of toilet paper to a bubble-wrapped pair of scissors will have my blood pressure rising as I attempt to gain access to the packaged product. The modern world seems to want to deny me access to any of its earthly delights by wrapping them all in plastic. Plastic isn't just bad for the planet, it's bad for my stress levels.

Medicine seems to be the worst offender. There's nothing to make a headache worse than having to open a pack of pills encased in extra-strength plastic. Even the 'earth-friendly' soap that we sometimes get is packed in plastic. We were once given a packet of organic biscuits that were individually wrapped in plastic. To top it off they tasted like something you would use in packaging.

I'm not alone in my despair with modern packaging design. There are even products made especially to deal with blister-packs and over-wrapped items. But, of course, these openers come in a blister-pack. Only light-bulbs, in their flimsy cardboard boxes, seem immune to the modern disease of over-packing.