Iceland Banned X-Ma's advert

keef32

keef32

Messages
1,139
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
Yes
I know there is a thread for Christmas Adverts but I feel like this needs it's own thread..

View: https://youtu.be/JdpspllWI2o


It's such a moving and brilliantly done advert and it's beyond the joke that it's been banned. But thankfully looks like it's probably going to have had a bigger reach in one way or another than if it was just aired on TV.

Don't think I have ever shed a tear at an advert before.

There is a petition if anyone wanted to get beind it and sign it!

https://www.change.org/p/release-iceland-s-banned-christmas-advert-on-tv-nopalmoilchristmas
 
Great ad.
But, how is this a Christmas ad?
They were showing it in June with no apparent furore.
Iceland being quite canny here.
 
Whoever thought up, this devious marketing ploy, deserves a raise ;) Not that I'm cynical or anything :D
 
It's a beautiful piece of marketing spin.

It hasn't been banned at all. Greenpeace made the advert and Greenpeace are essentially a political organisation. That's why it was prevented from broadcast by Clearcast and not (for example advertising standards). Iceland and Greenpeace would both have known this before they even submitted it. But they can claim it was "banned" and get, as the media kidz like to say, viral traction.

5 million views and wall to wall press coverage and they didn't even have to pay to broadcast it. Genius.
 
I saw the boss of Iceland being interviewed by Piers Morgan on breakfast TV and IMO he got utterly ripped to shreds.

I had thought that the ad was moving and shocking until that interview and now I think it's just a disgraceful piece of cynical and misleading marketing.

And for anyone who can't stomach watching the PM interview, Icelands own brand products are palm oil free but they're still selling two hundreds products that aren't and they're selling products containing the arguably twice as world damaging soya option.

Here it is...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Oxh8k2VKZg
 
It an amazingly moving video.......yes, the message clearly has a geo-political message underlying the marketing statement. Good on Iceland for taking that stance :) (fwiw we don't shop there!)

The demand for palm oil IMO is not lead by consumers, afteral how many of us even know or realise which products contain it let alone why the manufacturers saw the need to include it in their recipes???

Edit ~ typed whilst @woof woof was posting.......I abhor PM, so can I bear to see that video? PM also very much has his agenda!
 
Last edited:
Box Brownie said:
Edit ~ typed whilst @woof woof was posting.......I abhor PM, so can I bear to see that video? PM also very much has his agenda!
Click to expand...

But the points he raises remain valid and shouldn't be discounted because you can't bear a man you probably haven't met.

The headline of removing palm oil from own branded products is laudable but I wonder why they instead didn't do the same for products containing soya and there's still the issue of the 200 lines they sell that do contain palm oil.

I think they're done a good thing and are to be applauded for it but I do think they've made the best out of it that they possibly can and in a way which in retrospect looks rather manipulative, shrill and false given their lack of action on what looks to be the far more damaging soya. Maybe there are other and far more damaging ingredients than palm oil and soya? As consumers and customers it's hard for us to know and in many respects we therefore have to rely on the manufacturers and retailers but at times they seem far more interested in doing what may be the easier and more marketable option rather than the option that would perhaps have the most impact and do the most good.

I do think that interview gives a rather larger picture and takes a bit of the shine off what Iceland have done. All IMVHO of course.
 
Last edited:
Wasn't it banned because it was fronted and/or paid for by Greenpeace?
A fairly violent and aggressive political party?
 
keef32 said:
Greenpeace aren't a political party though are they?
Click to expand...

of course they are, what do you think they are?
They would like you to believe not.

They push an agenda like one
 
Mr Bump said:
of course they are, what do you think they are?
They would like you to believe not.

They push an agenda like one
Click to expand...

But they are not a political party, doesn't matter if you think they push an agenda like one, they are not a political party.
 
Mr Bump said:
Wasn't it banned because it was fronted and/or paid for by Greenpeace?
A fairly violent and aggressive political party?
Click to expand...
No.

From what I understand Iceland approached GP, the advert is part of a much longer video that GP originally produced some time ago.

Either way its a much better use of Christmas advert space than a shopping snowman or a monster that lives under a bed.
 
keef32 said:
But they are not a political party, doesn't matter if you think they push an agenda like one, they are not a political party.
Click to expand...

The standards authority disagree with you and so do I, there a bunch of anarchists that follow a political agenda masquerading as charity or whatever.
 
keef32 said:
But they are not a political party, doesn't matter if you think they push an agenda like one, they are not a political party.
Click to expand...
They are political organisation and English law forbids all political advertising - 2003 Communication Act.

The advert is not actually banned as that can only be done by the Advertising Standards Authority.
 
Last edited:
Mr Bump said:
The standards authority disagree with you and so do I, there a bunch of anarchists that follow a political agenda masquerading as charity or whatever.
Click to expand...

See my post above. It's nothing to do with the ridiculously toothless "standards" agency. It was rejected for broadcast by Clearsky because it essentially comes from a group proposing political change. Whether you agree with their aims and tactics or not, there's a clear rule against this.

woof woof said:
The headline of removing palm oil from own branded products is laudable but I wonder why they instead didn't do the same for products containing soya and there's still the issue of the 200 lines they sell that do contain palm oil.
Click to expand...

Ah, the great soya debate. That makes the palm oil argument look tame.

Basically, making huge amounts of anything is bad. The only viable option is culling humans. I suggest we start with people who are the most unlike me and work up.
 
Soylent Green?
 
JonathanRyan said:
I suggest we start with people who are the most unlike me and work up.
Click to expand...
Actually there was a news report today, no not culling humans, although I could think of a few apparently, there are far too many farm animals, cows and sheep were mentioned.
Seems we need to reduce these by up to 50% and plant tree's to help with the climate change thingy.
I'm not sure that an oak, lettuce and tomato sarnie is a viable replacement for a Mutton lettuce and tomato sarnie though :thinking:
 
Last edited:
Cobra said:
Actually there was a news report today, no not culling humans, although I could think of a few apparently, there are far too many farm animals, cows and sheep were mentioned.
Click to expand...

Yeah, for some reason, lots of people say really stupid things to vegans. One of my favourites is "if we didn't eat these animals they would die out". Ummmmmm..........
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top