Beans Advert Pulled.

that is one of the most original ads i have seen in a long while, i was expecting the sweet embrace, but thats pretty tame, no worse than a bisto ad or what not.
 
yak.h'cir said:
I wouldn't agree with that. I was under the impression that it had been shown that in order for everyone to succeed as a group/species then everyone should act in a way to benefit the group. Whilst many of the qualities listed would probably benefit the individual they probably wouldn't benefit the group.
Click to expand...

They are traits that leaders of groups tend to have, albeit in varying quantities.
 
Has Tefal come out of the closest in the past 6 pages? He's always so interested in these gay threads.

And the illness thing is still laughable. I'm not ill. I can go shoot my juice in some girl and have a kid. I've reproduced.
 
If they were straight gays then it should stay but if they were those weird camp gays that stupid noises come out of their mouths then it should go.
 
yak.h'cir said:
I was under the impression that it had been shown that in order for everyone to succeed as a group/species then everyone should act in a way to benefit the group.
Click to expand...

Very off topic, but that is exactly what doesn't happen. Group selection is an old and very flawed concept. As is selection at the individual level. What we see is selection at the genetic level, at the expense of the individual and group levels.
 
Its an advert fs, maybe i should complain at the nike adverts because i cant run as fast as ronaldo racing a bugatti veyron

OMG its an illness, its not natural to run that fast, its an illness.

fs, its a harmless advert.

I liked it.
 
Nitefly said:
Very off topic, but that is exactly what doesn't happen. Group selection is an old and very flawed concept. As is selection at the individual level. What we see is selection at the genetic level, at the expense of the individual and group levels.
Click to expand...

I think you might be confused. We were talking about behaviour patterns not genetics.
 
Nitefly said:
All group behavioural patterns are a result of the interest of the gene. There is absolutely no interest in the benefit of the group. As I said, very off topic...
Click to expand...

Maybe I'm confused. My post was in reference to a comment about whether hate, greed, theft, covertousness, aggression, deceit, etc were beneficial to an individual/group of people. Not what causes the traits in the first place/how they came to be.

I.e. the group as a whole is more successful when they all work together for a common interest rather then competing against each other.
 
yak.h'cir said:
I.e. the group as a whole is more successful when they all work together for a common interest rather then competing against each other.
Click to expand...

Even so, thats at the gene level. Which is why insects will work to fight intruders to save a queen, dispite never reproducing themselves (they share the queen's genes, their sucess is increased by ensuring the queen's survival). There is no such thing as 'for the benefit of the group', it simply doesn't happen.

I was being very very anal, sorry. May the thread continue!
 
Tefal said:
I meant read the artical not the thread, the thread is crap.

But the ad was almost certainly made and pulled for the controversy of it's pulling (:o oo err)and the massive free publicity, not the tiny amounts of complaints.
Click to expand...

I didn't think I was being particularly unclear here. I don't think the advert should have been pulled, regardless of whether Heinz created it with the sole intention of creating controversy and removing it in short order or whether they just didn't expect X number of complaints and bottled it (no pun intended). The article affects my views not one iota, nor does whether the ASA decide to investigate or not.

It seems a rather risky strategy to create an advert if you know it will be controversial, display it then pull it so that it looks as if you've backed down at the first sign of trouble and then expect to achieve many sales on the back of it. However I'm not in the 'science' of marketing so maybe I'm underestimating the muppets here.
 
Nitefly said:
Even so, thats at the gene level. Which is why insects will work to fight intruders to save a queen, dispite never reproducing themselves (they share the queen's genes, their sucess is increased by ensuring the queen's survival).

I was being very very anal, sorry. May the thread continue!
Click to expand...

Sorry I'm still not following you! From the example you've just given it sounds like it supports what I was saying, i.e. the ants all work together to protect the queen, rather then saying 'screw that I'm going to save myself'.
 
yak.h'cir said:
Sorry I'm still not following you! From the example you've just given it sounds like it supports what I was saying, i.e. the ants all work together to protect the queen, rather then saying 'screw that I'm going to save myself'.
Click to expand...

They do not work together to protect the Queen, they work together to protect the Queen's genes.

A worker will have 50% (0.5) of a queen's genes. They can not reproduce by themselves (for various reasons), therefore the only way they ensure the worker genes abundance in the future is by ensuring protecting the queen and their siblings.

The same thing is seen in mole rats, which will give themselves up to predators 'for the good of the colony', but in reality they are simply protecting their own genes. Its called altruism / reciprocal altruism - very interesting.

Its accepted that all behaviour is based on similar behaviour, and this is the subject of Richard Dawkin's groundbreaking book 'the selfish gene'.

Sorry, soooo off topic :o
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom