You know what really makes me laugh about all this censoring lark.
I remember my dad telling me once while i was watching road runner, that if you fall or jump off a cliff there is no trees or branches conveniently placed to grab hold of to save yourself like there is in these cartoons. I think i was about 7 at the time. I remember saying " I know daddy, i'm not silly".
How times have changed.
What's worse? ask yourselves honestly now...! Tom and Jerry or Itchy and Scratchy?
None, 'Happy Tree Friends' is the worst. Which is a good thing, good thing.
lol,
Going back on topic, I think that all scenes which glamourise smoking should be banned, when shown to children. It isn't political correctness, in my opinion. To me it is common sense. Smoking has a fatally dangerous glamourous-image. This is fatal. Go round a class, ánd see who thinks that it is glamourous to jump off cliffs, and catch oneself on a branch. Go round the class and ask who thinks it is glamourous to smoke, and it is worth smoking if it boosts your image, and I'm sure a few will agree—even if they think that it shouldn't have a glamourous image, and personnaly don't like it. I've had many exuses, which defending saying that
"it isn't as bad as people make out
"the N.h.s. spends more money in toher areas than smoking, and the taxes taken from cigarettes funds the things that smoking causes".
To me, this is the mindset, where the smoker wants to make themselves feel less ‘guilty’ aobut it. Definately, anything which encourages children to smoke, is bad. It should be removed.
My badly made earlier point was, was that i think that all things, for children's viewin'g, that has a glamourised cigarette, should be removed, not just to Tom and Jerry. Of course doing it to just 'Tom and Jery' would be pointless. It should be A UNIversall move. Banning it on Tom And jERY WOUld be part of this. Yes, it would be the start of a new change. Not a dangerous change, a very safe change. Where the fatal glamour of smoking would have its fuel removed, or one of the fuels. No, I don't htink it would be the start of politically correct censorship. I would be very against this censorship on adult screenings of the shows, and also censor ship, for something like recycling, in child shows.
For instance I'd be very against, banning all scenes where landfill site dumps are glamourised, becauswe we need to move a way from that. Unlike smoking, ther isn't a cult glamour image aobut landfil sites. All we need to do is start to re-cycle more. A slight change. We'll be throwing away, but, indeed, throwing away into another bin, which will go to a recycling centre, as opposed to a landfil centre. It isn't as, definate as smoking, where either one smokes, or they don't.
Someone on here said that they thought that the scenen in question didn't glamourise smoking, only it was use dfor comic effect. Doesn't the article, which this thread is about, say 'Glamourised'?
Going back tyo smoking, the cigarette comapnies have worked very hard to establish this image. My mum was subjected to a massive bollard-poster, which boasted hwo cool it was to smoke. To me, this is the cause of the longevity the habit has had. In the playground, this image has remained. Smokers' children see their parents smoking. "My mum does it, so it must be okay!". I thijnk that companie4s new that the world would wise-up, so they needed to make an inital reason to buy them, to me that was, for the image, because the others were buying the cigarettes. This image is infectious, because it was made a social one. The cool person smoked. So everyone else does it. The six formers did it, their first formers saw it and did it. When they got to the six form, the new first formers saw the now six-formers do it. IU saw a documentary aobut "What makes us human", and it said about how we culturely copy what the cool people do. This is good for us, but also bad for us. |Marketers tap into this, because if the cool person does something, everyone else will.
In my opinion, Cigarette companies were left with the perfect forumula. Other companies that targeted the 'cool' people had their products go into fashion, but then they go out of fashion. Why no the cigarette? Well, I think that this is because it is addictivie. The cool person, would have to try to to stop. So, the cool perople would most likely do this for a while, so they don't ever stop, or when they do, they are no longer in their heir-arcal position, and they've got the latest 'cool-person' to smoke, who will do the same, so it doesn't really go out of fashion.
Due to my opinions about how the image got their, and how infectious i think it is, I think we must do everything we can to make this image disappear. We have to make it 'go out of fashion'.
None, 'Happy Tree Friends' is the worst. Which is a good thing, good thing.
lol,
Going back on topic, I think that all scenes which glamourise smoking should be banned, when shown to children. It isn't political correctness, in my opinion. To me it is common sense. Smoking has a fatally dangerous glamourous-image. This is fatal. Go round a class, ánd see who thinks that it is glamourous to jump off cliffs, and catch oneself on a branch. Go round the class and ask who thinks it is glamourous to smoke, and it is worth smoking if it boosts your image, and I'm sure a few will agree—even if they think that it shouldn't have a glamourous image, and personnaly don't like it. I've had many exuses, which defending saying that
"it isn't as bad as people make out
"the N.h.s. spends more money in toher areas than smoking, and the taxes taken from cigarettes funds the things that smoking causes".
To me, this is the mindset, where the smoker wants to make themselves feel less ‘guilty’ aobut it. Definately, anything which encourages children to smoke, is bad. It should be removed.
My badly made earlier point was, was that i think that all things, for children's viewin'g, that has a glamourised cigarette, should be removed, not just to Tom and Jerry. Of course doing it to just 'Tom and Jery' would be pointless. It should be A UNIversall move. Banning it on Tom And jERY WOUld be part of this. Yes, it would be the start of a new change. Not a dangerous change, a very safe change. Where the fatal glamour of smoking would have its fuel removed, or one of the fuels. No, I don't htink it would be the start of politically correct censorship. I would be very against this censorship on adult screenings of the shows, and also censor ship, for something like recycling, in child shows.
For instance I'd be very against, banning all scenes where landfill site dumps are glamourised, becauswe we need to move a way from that. Unlike smoking, ther isn't a cult glamour image aobut landfil sites. All we need to do is start to re-cycle more. A slight change. We'll be throwing away, but, indeed, throwing away into another bin, which will go to a recycling centre, as opposed to a landfil centre. It isn't as, definate as smoking, where either one smokes, or they don't.
Someone on here said that they thought that the scenen in question didn't glamourise smoking, only it was use dfor comic effect. Doesn't the article, which this thread is about, say 'Glamourised'?
Going back tyo smoking, the cigarette comapnies have worked very hard to establish this image. My mum was subjected to a massive bollard-poster, which boasted hwo cool it was to smoke. To me, this is the cause of the longevity the habit has had. In the playground, this image has remained. Smokers' children see their parents smoking. "My mum does it, so it must be okay!". I thijnk that companie4s new that the world would wise-up, so they needed to make an inital reason to buy them, to me that was, for the image, because the others were buying the cigarettes. This image is infectious, because it was made a social one. The cool person smoked. So everyone else does it. The six formers did it, their first formers saw it and did it. When they got to the six form, the new first formers saw the now six-formers do it. IU saw a documentary aobut "What makes us human", and it said about how we culturely copy what the cool people do. This is good for us, but also bad for us. |Marketers tap into this, because if the cool person does something, everyone else will.
In my opinion, Cigarette companies were left with the perfect forumula. Other companies that targeted the 'cool' people had their products go into fashion, but then they go out of fashion. Why no the cigarette? Well, I think that this is because it is addictivie. The cool person, would have to try to to stop. So, the cool perople would most likely do this for a while, so they don't ever stop, or when they do, they are no longer in their heir-arcal position, and they've got the latest 'cool-person' to smoke, who will do the same, so it doesn't really go out of fashion.
Due to my opinions about how the image got their, and how infectious i think it is, I think we must do everything we can to make this image disappear. We have to make it 'go out of fashion'.
None, 'Happy Tree Friends' is the worst. Which is a good thing, good thing.
lol,
Going back on topic, I think that all scenes which glamourise smoking should be banned, when shown to children. It isn't political correctness, in my opinion. To me it is common sense. Smoking has a fatally dangerous glamourous-image. This is fatal. Go round a class, ánd see who thinks that it is glamourous to jump off cliffs, and catch oneself on a branch. Go round the class and ask who thinks it is glamourous to smoke, and it is worth smoking if it boosts your image, and I'm sure a few will agree—even if they think that it shouldn't have a glamourous image, and personnaly don't like it. I've had many exuses, which defending saying that
"it isn't as bad as people make out
"the N.h.s. spends more money in toher areas than smoking, and the taxes taken from cigarettes funds the things that smoking causes".
To me, this is the mindset, where the smoker wants to make themselves feel less ‘guilty’ aobut it. Definately, anything which encourages children to smoke, is bad. It should be removed.
My badly made earlier point was, was that i think that all things, for children's viewin'g, that has a glamourised cigarette, should be removed, not just to Tom and Jerry. Of course doing it to just 'Tom and Jery' would be pointless. It should be A UNIversall move. Banning it on Tom And jERY WOUld be part of this. Yes, it would be the start of a new change. Not a dangerous change, a very safe change. Where the fatal glamour of smoking would have its fuel removed, or one of the fuels. No, I don't htink it would be the start of politically correct censorship. I would be very against this censorship on adult screenings of the shows, and also censor ship, for something like recycling, in child shows.
For instance I'd be very against, banning all scenes where landfill site dumps are glamourised, becauswe we need to move a way from that. Unlike smoking, ther isn't a cult glamour image aobut landfil sites. All we need to do is start to re-cycle more. A slight change. We'll be throwing away, but, indeed, throwing away into another bin, which will go to a recycling centre, as opposed to a landfil centre. It isn't as, definate as smoking, where either one smokes, or they don't.
Someone on here said that they thought that the scenen in question didn't glamourise smoking, only it was use dfor comic effect. Doesn't the article, which this thread is about, say 'Glamourised'?
Going back tyo smoking, the cigarette comapnies have worked very hard to establish this image. My mum was subjected to a massive bollard-poster, which boasted hwo cool it was to smoke. To me, this is the cause of the longevity the habit has had. In the playground, this image has remained. Smokers' children see their parents smoking. "My mum does it, so it must be okay!". I thijnk that companie4s new that the world would wise-up, so they needed to make an inital reason to buy them, to me that was, for the image, because the others were buying the cigarettes. This image is infectious, because it was made a social one. The cool person smoked. So everyone else does it. The six formers did it, their first formers saw it and did it. When they got to the six form, the new first formers saw the now six-formers do it. IU saw a documentary aobut "What makes us human", and it said about how we culturely copy what the cool people do. This is good for us, but also bad for us. |Marketers tap into this, because if the cool person does something, everyone else will.
In my opinion, Cigarette companies were left with the perfect forumula. Other companies that targeted the 'cool' people had their products go into fashion, but then they go out of fashion. Why no the cigarette? Well, I think that this is because it is addictivie. The cool person, would have to try to to stop. So, the cool perople would most likely do this for a while, so they don't ever stop, or when they do, they are no longer in their heir-arcal position, and they've got the latest 'cool-person' to smoke, who will do the same, so it doesn't really go out of fashion.
Due to my opinions about how the image got their, and how infectious i think it is, I think we must do everything we can to make this image disappear. We have to make it 'go out of fashion'.
Waffle.
RDM-- you're not David Cameron by any chance? Firstly only
one
person complained to Ofcom, so it can't have that much of an impact on viewers.
As I have stated before, I'm pretty sure that peer-pressure and parents' attitudes towards smoking are far more of an influence on whether a child takes up smoking, than a few seconds on a cartoon
None, 'Happy Tree Friends' is the worst. Which is a good thing, good thing.
lol,
Going back on topic, I think that all scenes which glamourise smoking should be banned, when shown to children. It isn't political correctness, in my opinion. To me it is common sense. Smoking has a fatally dangerous glamourous-image. This is fatal. Go round a class, ánd see who thinks that it is glamourous to jump off cliffs, and catch oneself on a branch. Go round the class and ask who thinks it is glamourous to smoke, and it is worth smoking if it boosts your image, and I'm sure a few will agree—even if they think that it shouldn't have a glamourous image, and personnaly don't like it. I've had many exuses, which defending saying that
"it isn't as bad as people make out
"the N.h.s. spends more money in toher areas than smoking, and the taxes taken from cigarettes funds the things that smoking causes".
To me, this is the mindset, where the smoker wants to make themselves feel less ‘guilty’ aobut it. Definately, anything which encourages children to smoke, is bad. It should be removed.
My badly made earlier point was, was that i think that all things, for children's viewin'g, that has a glamourised cigarette, should be removed, not just to Tom and Jerry. Of course doing it to just 'Tom and Jery' would be pointless. It should be A UNIversall move. Banning it on Tom And jERY WOUld be part of this. Yes, it would be the start of a new change. Not a dangerous change, a very safe change. Where the fatal glamour of smoking would have its fuel removed, or one of the fuels. No, I don't htink it would be the start of politically correct censorship. I would be very against this censorship on adult screenings of the shows, and also censor ship, for something like recycling, in child shows.
For instance I'd be very against, banning all scenes where landfill site dumps are glamourised, becauswe we need to move a way from that. Unlike smoking, ther isn't a cult glamour image aobut landfil sites. All we need to do is start to re-cycle more. A slight change. We'll be throwing away, but, indeed, throwing away into another bin, which will go to a recycling centre, as opposed to a landfil centre. It isn't as, definate as smoking, where either one smokes, or they don't.
Someone on here said that they thought that the scenen in question didn't glamourise smoking, only it was use dfor comic effect. Doesn't the article, which this thread is about, say 'Glamourised'?
Going back tyo smoking, the cigarette comapnies have worked very hard to establish this image. My mum was subjected to a massive bollard-poster, which boasted hwo cool it was to smoke. To me, this is the cause of the longevity the habit has had. In the playground, this image has remained. Smokers' children see their parents smoking. "My mum does it, so it must be okay!". I thijnk that companie4s new that the world would wise-up, so they needed to make an inital reason to buy them, to me that was, for the image, because the others were buying the cigarettes. This image is infectious, because it was made a social one. The cool person smoked. So everyone else does it. The six formers did it, their first formers saw it and did it. When they got to the six form, the new first formers saw the now six-formers do it. IU saw a documentary aobut "What makes us human", and it said about how we culturely copy what the cool people do. This is good for us, but also bad for us. |Marketers tap into this, because if the cool person does something, everyone else will.
In my opinion, Cigarette companies were left with the perfect forumula. Other companies that targeted the 'cool' people had their products go into fashion, but then they go out of fashion. Why no the cigarette? Well, I think that this is because it is addictivie. The cool person, would have to try to to stop. So, the cool perople would most likely do this for a while, so they don't ever stop, or when they do, they are no longer in their heir-arcal position, and they've got the latest 'cool-person' to smoke, who will do the same, so it doesn't really go out of fashion.
Due to my opinions about how the image got their, and how infectious i think it is, I think we must do everything we can to make this image disappear. We have to make it 'go out of fashion'.
Waffle.
RDM-- you're not David Cameron by any chance? Firstly only
one
person complained to Ofcom, so it can't have that much of an impact on viewers.
As I have stated before, I'm pretty sure that peer-pressure and parents' attitudes towards smoking are far more of an influence on whether a child takes up smoking, than a few seconds on a cartoon
My point is that the glamourous image is one of the fuels for the peer-pressure. Hense, if there is a movement to actively remove the fuels from the media, to the vulnerable age-group—who care more about fitting-in, than their own long-term health—then the peer-pressure will start to reduce. Things are better, in my opinion, but there is a far mroe progress to be made.
Without going off on one about the NHS and smokers... Does a large chunk of the levy charged on cigarettes fund the NHS or not. I'll think you find it does. If everyone stop smoking the money would have to come from somewhere else. The goverment do their bit to try and make us quit and appease the anti smoking brigade but really they don't want us quit, there is too much money to made from us. That's why it really pisses me off when people say smokers with smoking related illnesses shouldn't be treated by the NHS as we cost the NHS too much money.
Also Del monte, without sounding too hypocritical, don't you go on and on and on.
My point is that the glamourous image is one of the fuels for the peer-pressure. Hense, if there is a movement to actively remove the fuels from the media, to the vulnerable age-group—who care more about fitting-in, than their own long-term health—then the peer-pressure will start to reduce. Things are better, in my opinion, but there is a far mroe progress to be made.
From "Yes, Minister" (not the exact quote, but roughly the same):
Jim Hacker: Smoking related diseases cause 100,000 premature deaths a year!
Sir Humphrey: Yes, but we've been through all that. It has been proven that if these people were to have lived to a ripe old age, then they would have cost the government more money in pensions and social security than they did in medical treatment!
Firstly only