Make Poverty History ads banned
 Make Poverty History has been banned from advertising on television and radio. The "click" ads featuring people such as Kate Moss, Kylie Minogue and Brad Pitt, were ruled to have a political message and so subject to the 2003 Communications Act. This law bans groups that could be seen to have a political end, such as pro-hunting campaigners, from advertising.
Oxfam spokesman Adrian Lovett, a member of the Make Poverty History team, said it was disappointed with the decision. "This advertisement simply highlights the fact that a child dies every three seconds because of preventable poverty. The millions of people who are wearing a white band or taking action as part of this campaign do not see it as a narrow party political issue. They see it as the great moral issue of our time," he added.
Mr Lovett said the MPH coalition would have to examine the implications as its campaign continued with action at the UN world summit in New York.
What do you think? Are the Make Poverty History ads "political"?
posted at 9:51 AM
| Permalink
7 comments
Comments:
GenerationWhy and Oxfam accept no responsibility for the content of comments in the Blog.
yes, but isn't everything. The rule is ridiculous - it needs clarification
By ,
September 14, 2005 3:25 PM
Of course the ads are political - if that's not allowed, why were they ever on TV? The question is why should all political adverts be banned? It's a curb on our right to free speech.
By Edd,
September 14, 2005 4:45 PM
as much as i think the decision to ban the advert was a stupid decision. in truth the adverts were hardly ever on tv or radio, i certainly havnt seen one for a while. banning the adverts simply makes more take notice, im very angry at the decision but perhaps others who are angry will be more determined to support the cause
By ,
September 16, 2005 6:45 PM
Stupid!
By ,
September 20, 2005 11:25 AM
The ads are political. Everyone is political whether they mean to be or not. Even what you buy in a shop is political. If you shop in a certain supermarket you are supporting the Labour party indirectly. If you bank with a particular bank, you are supporting the Conservatives indirectly.
It's important to have a law banning poltical ads because otherwise, we end up with a democracy as in the USA where the people with the most money win elections rather than the people with the best arguments.
By Chris Williams,
September 22, 2005 10:45 AM
Chris you say
The ads are political. Everyone is political whether they mean to be or not. Even what you buy in a shop is political. If you shop in a certain supermarket you are supporting the Labour party indirectly. If you bank with a particular bank, you are supporting the Conservatives indirectly.
In which case there should be NO ads on the TV or radio.
Lets be honest this rule is to cover politixcal parties not charities. This ad is about as political as EVERY other ad that is for a charity (seem to remember one of the childres charities did something similar with the stop child abise full stop campagne). It mentions no political party, it mentions no country, all it says is that children in a certain group of countries are dying. Is that really that political I suppose it is for governments who choose not to do anything about it.
One thing I would like to ask is IF this ad was so problomatical WHY was it not pulled before it even went out? It could and choould have been if it breaks the rules. In truth it does not, it was just causing embaracement to certain parties globally who are reluctant to do many things that involve anything other than their own interests.
By ,
October 01, 2005 5:24 PM
i think this is ridiculous, the ad is an amazing and moving ad and people need to see that on the tv. When i saw it, i was deeply moved and wanted to do something about those poor people.
By ,
November 21, 2005 3:55 AM
Post a Comment
|
|
