Protection from adverts?

I decided to post questions on this forum to find some opinions on this subject as i felt that opinions from a specialist group would help my investigation. As well as this i have conducted a questionnaire for the general public to answer, which has provided me with more primary research along with the numerous emails i have sent, i am not relying on answers from this site as my primary research, i thought it may aid my research.
Your replies concerning sterotypes about students are not related to my questions and do not apply to me. I simply posted questions to get some opinions on adverts but in return all i have got is abuse about the sort of person you think i am.
Im sure i could provide you with a few sterotypical images i have of the types of people who sit on their computer replying to forums with abuse about the person who posted it, rather than answering the question itself.

Oh. I thought you said:



So which is it?

my research is what aids my investigation

I'll answer your questions if nobody else will (suspicious lot, give the girl a break )



ones that state some sort of percentages like '40% less fat'. How would the average buyer know what constitutes 40% less when we don't know what constitutes 100% in the first place



For me, one that insults my intelligence. An ad where the entire community parades down the street singing the praises of a certain brand of spread. You eat a bar of chocolate and get accosted by an animatronic sheep our turn into a cartoon character if you eat a certain brand of sweets.



Yes, from misleading ones, like the toothpaste ad which has been hammered because apparently 8 out of ten dentists prefered their brand along with another one.

Offence is a matter of personal opinion, I'm not offended by nudity for example but others are, there were complains about the quaker oats adverts with windy miller because there was a nude character in one of them. Personaly if you can get offended by a plasticine model of a naked human, let alone a real one, then you have some serious body hang ups. People complain at nudity in shower comercial, we all get naked to shower so you may see a naked human in a shampoo comercial, just live with it.



as effective as they can be. if you've just buried the family cat you may be offended by kittikat comercials so offence is a tricky one, at the end of the day they seem to be on top of the misleading ones though.

hope that answer the questions. good luck with the course.

The only thing I cast doubt on was that this student was told to visit an internet forum to perform research.

You're a teacher Steve. Would you suggest such a thing?

This study is supposed to furnish the student with an A grade. Year in, year out we hear that exams are "getting easier".

This type of lazy research does nothing to negate that criticism.

I'll answer your questions, but whether or not they're the answers your looking for is another thing



Like Steve K said when they claim things like percentages or "we asked lots of people" then at the bottom in very small print it says something like "50 people surveyed". Alot of the Loan/Insurance ads are misleading in their "clauses" that apply to their offers



Ad's that are in your face and just generally annoying, the current one that comes to mind is USwitch which is just ridiculous in my opnion. Also that Quorn advert which is just down right rude, girl gets angry because people are eating "her" Quorn. WHAT !?!?!



Depends really, the one thing I think with the Loan/Insurance adverts is that the Terms & Conditions, although wrote on screen, are a times illegible or not on screen long enough for people to read



Again it depends, they have banned several adverts over the years, those of note the X-Box advert with the new born baby rapidly ageing & ending up in a coffin & the Pot Noodle, The sl*g of all snacks both which received complaints and were banned. The loan/insurance ones are a different matter of course and have continued to be present since 1999/2000



Hope this info helps

I must admit when I spot a researcher in the street, I go the other way, but why give the poor girl grief.

We all have a view & opinions & ask questions on here, so what's different?

Are some of us being snobby?

One that either (a) does not give enough information about the product or service being advertised, (b) uses jargon that will be alien to its audience, thus influencing the audience's opinion on the jargon relative to the product (for example, adverts for PC World which constantly say "512 meg is a huge amount of memory" when it simply isn't), (c) demonstrates the product in a way that may be harmful or uncapable (Cillit Bang penny test - need I say more?) or (d) simply uses an unrelated metaphor. Related metaphors (like the Mac/PC adverts) are fine. Showing a flock of starlings (which is albeit beautiful) and then a Carling logo is simply unrelated and misleading. Anyway, what have starlings done to deserve being Carling's poster boys?


Something that (a) stereotypes a specific group, be they a specific age range, culture, dress style, etc..., (b) that makes unnecessary use of violence, provocative nudity, sex or bad language to illustrate its point or (c) patronises its audience.


Yes.


No. They could only be bothered to remove the infuriating and in places offensive Crazy Frog advert after several months blighting our screens.

I work in an infant school with 6-7 year olds so probably not in my case but for older children aged 14-16 or college students it could be beneficial in improving their IT skills and learning new ways to communicate and conduct surveys.

I can see where there may be a concern for encouraging young adults to visit internet forums but coming on this site to ask specific questions about television to members who like discussing television is not like going in a chat room and asking any old bod who happens to be there what they think. It could also be safer having the class on line in the computer room with the teacher supervising than spread out around the town unsupervised asking complete strangers questions.

At the end of the day I don't know the age of the student asking the questions but as her teacher came on here to defend her motives I would assume she is doing genuine research. If it's an A level assignment the criteria may be set by the examining board so they could have decided that the students go on forums to do surveys, not the teacher.

Gavin Scott just sounds like a bitter and twisted old man who "graduated from the university of life" and is jealous of those of us who managed to get a decent education.

I used a similar technique when I conducted my university research into the attitudes held by the public towards lesbians. Worked a treat, I got a 2:1 and a load of opinions I never could have got from stopping people on the street. That's why people avoid market researchers, cos it means they'd have to think whilst doing shopping, which is hard for most of the brain-dead frequenters of the British high-street. At least the people on here know how to work a computer.

I also deduce that from his ranting Gavin thinks that TV Forum is not an accurate cross-section of society and that it should not be used for public research.

Careful don't annoy him

It's OK he's probably off down the street kicking down snowmen.