Censorship

[grenniespex]

Hi. I just read a post here which made some criticism of JRT doing the Barclaycard ad and it has now been deleted. Although I would agree the post was to some repects inflamatory and (possibly insulting to Julian) I think it is a shame that the post has been censored.
I hope it is still possible to critise JRT on this when we feel like it, though hopefully in more measured tones, as he is a big grown-up boy and I'd hope more than capable of standing up to some critique!
As for th Barclaycard ad. there is a line where doing ad voiceovers and simply acting in ads (something many actors do to keep the wolf from the door) crosses over into celebrity endorsement of a product. This line has definately been crossed by the Barclaycard ads by Stephen and Julian, its just a question of whether people find this a problem?
That poster clearly did. I'm personally in two minds. I would be interested to know what others think?

Yours with all good wishes, grenniespex.

[Jools]

I deleted the post not because it was questioning Julian's conduct but because of the language contained therein and because the post seemed nothing but a post to inflame, especially as this was the first post this user had ever posted. I certainly don't wish to censor for anything other than bad language or posts that are intended to cause offense, however in this instance I felt it better to remove the post before a full out war began. We have also had some suspicious activity from spammers recently and I was erring on the side of caution.

I would also like to add that Hells and I invest a lot of time in the site to ensure that it is a nice and polite place to visit for all.
Thanks

[grenniespex]

I'm sure you do - and very grateful I am for it too!


I am also very keen that the posting should always remain polite!
Just wanted to make sure that it is OK to criticise and that a valid citicism can remain logged.

Thanks again for all your hard work on this site and hope stupid spammers don't get on top of you!

grenniespex

[lucifire]

Thank you grenniespex, I was asking the same question myself. Firstly apologies for any bad language that resulted in my post being pulled. I'm a moderator myself, but I only ever delete spam as it's a forum for free thinkers.

What's my point? well, without being crude or rude, I believe it's a sell out. I know that JRT himself questioned the encouragement of debt - too late now is all I'm saying. I wish celebs ( as opposed to faceless actors) would consider what it is they are endorsing, rather than being so easily seduced by the dollar.

[chatterbox]

I do understand your point but I don't think this is celebrity endorsement, this is using established fictional characters to sell a product. Julian and Steve are both actors doing a job and I don't see what is so terrible about that. I would rather they got a bit of easy work to pay for them to do things they really want to.

And I quite enjoy watching the ads as well

[Rosie]

Well said, chatterbox. Julian and Stephen are both intelligent people and I'm sure they'd have discussed the pros and cons of doing the ads, both financially and morally. Their decision is really none of our business as we're not in their shoes.

And as well as the money, I'm sure the chance of working together again must have been an inducement to them - they're such a great team.

[grenniespex]

Hi all,

Glad we have got some proper civilised discussion going over all this now!
Firstly I really do think that SM and JRT's involvement in the advert is celebrity endorsement and not just a bit of work for jobbing actors. They may not be hollywood megastars but they are famous enough to have their own fansites and forums and are known faces. I don't see the difference between playing established characters and being established actors it is still using a certain level of fame to sell a product.

The question for me is really. Is this a problem? For Lucifire it clearly is (by the way Hello Lucifire glad your second post was more considered than your first). I really think that unless you are going to go all the way and ban advertising for products that may have some moral questionability about them (which basically means banning adverts all together cos pretty much everything does) then it is hard to criticise celebs from earning money endorsing products?

The only question I would have for Julian is that by associating himself with things like the Observer Ethical Awards he is setting himself up to be criticsed when involving himself with less than ethical organisations.

Lucifire - perhaps as his invovlement clearly offends your own ethical sensibilities you might write (politely) to Julian stating your opinion about Barclaycard and asking for his response? Better to do something about something you feel strongly about rather than just writing rants into forums?

grenniespex

[minimarsbar]

How many people on this forum over the age of 18 have a credit card? I have more than one (non of them Barclays I might ad) but not through a personal decision - they just haven't offered me any incentives to transfer my balances like others have. We all know how great Julian and Steve are, but to be honest, they are by no means mega stars and people I've spoken don't know them at all and just think the pairing is for a comedy routine - a good one at that. Julian has been known to do voiceovers for kids pop - unhealthy, sugary stuff, and British gas who are being slated about profit etc. I think if he advertised tap water some people would be offended because certain water companies have bad reputations regarding service and the environment. To be honest, the type of person eligable for the Barclaycard product being advertised will have been targeted already by mail and will not be influenced by who is in the ads - they just serve as a reminder. Did Jennifer Saunders get so much flack?

[chatterbox]

I agree that they are using a certain level of fame to sell a product, but I would still distinguish between playing a role and the actor being 'themselves'. I realise this is often blurred, and the advertisers do their best to make it as seamless as possible, but I think the distinction is still there, regardless of how well known the actor is. For example, I would feel differently if Julian was jumping up and down on chat show sofas and in interviews declaring the benefits of Barclaycard.

Of course actors have to make their own moral judgements about what work they choose to take, but don't see any distinction between advertising and any other role as long as it is clearly that.

As you say Grennispex, it largely comes down to our view about advertising. I personally don't object to it as long as it is clearly signposted, and think of it as an integral part of the way the media works. I expect to make my own judgements about products, and therefore don't object to actors working in the field, even if it is a product I don't want or approve of.

Thanks for the debate by the way - enjoying it!

[grenniespex]

Cool glad you are enjoying it - I am too! And I'm glad its in good spirits as well.

I'm also gonna add that I really appreciate what a great group of people there are on this forum. And the general enthusiasm for all things JRT

I'm also, also gonna add in response to Rosies post that I love seeing Julian and Stephen working together and would love to see them do so more often. Perhaps next time in something more longterm and meaningful than an advert

grenniespex

[pinks]

The only question I would have for Julian is that by associating himself with things like the Observer Ethical Awards he is setting himself up to be criticsed when involving himself with less than ethical organisations.

i couldn't agree more, grenniespex

i've only just managed to pop in at the end of the week, and seem to have missed quite a discussion point.

i do feel quite strongly about this and had already commented as such in the threat about the CALM ad. CALM is such a fantastic thing for do, and i do think its a shame that he's doing the barclaycard ad. for me it's not about the endorsement of debt... as adults we are free to get into as much or as little debt as we choose, and for preference if he was going to do an ad for a credit card better it be for the co-op bank than barclays. its the less than ethical investment of barclays that concerns me most.

part of me feels like writing and asking him, but then, actually it is none of my business, he's got to keep himself in ice blue shirts and marshmallows somehow!

[chatterbox]

I think Minimarsbar makes an good point - there are very few companies that are really squeaky clean, and different things will upset different people. The actors have to make their own judgements, and stand by them, as we all do. Julian is doing some work with good causes, and so he's doing more than some - to then criticise him for taking pretty standard actor work seems to me to be a bit unfair. He's made a few compromises, but as I'm not perfect, I don't feel I'm in a position to criticise.

Plus, I saw the speedboat ad again tonight, and it did cheer me up - I'm clearly very shallow!

[lucifire]

Clearly. You are all BIG JRT fans, and as I’m on ‘your’ territory, I’ll try not to offend.

I don’t like marketing and advertising, especially when it is dressed up to be something it isn’t. As someone said earlier, Barclays (and nearly all big corporations) have very shady dealings; they are just kept well hidden, under an illusion of respectability. I’m tired of the illusion and scaremongering going on all around, I’m tired of the big corporations swallowing up every high street, and I’m tired of celebrities courting the media when it suits ..’ oh, look at me doing my bit for the good of the planet..’ and in the same breath, turning around and selling out to the highest bidder – literally.

I can’t find anything to respect in one so clearly lacking in moral fibre. I’m disappointed to see this is a growing trend, and please don’t tell me it’s because they are earning a crust, that’s laughable. Check Jay Leno, he earns over three million bucks per year, and yet he still hawks corn snacks to bovine America, the list is endless – I could write to JRT, as was suggested, I could also ask him to his face, but what would be the point? He’s already made a statement by doing such ads, and as I said in my original post ( easy ladies..I’m going to rephrase!), anything the man tried to say earnestly, would fall on deaf ears.

Think about it ladies, if advertising didn’t work, then why is it such a HUGE industry?


In the words of the late and great Bill Hicks ‘We are nothing more than a virus in shoes’.

Harsh? Maybe, but just look at the world around us, he had a point.

[chatterbox]

Of course advertising works Lucifire, otherwise there wouldn't be an advertising industry, but I don't think the solution is necessarily to abolish them. I think it is the responsibility of everyone to think these things through for themselves, and to publicise their concerns, to encourage ethical behaviour.

From my perspective, I can live with advertising for what else it provides - such as subscription free media, free at point of delivery. However, I fully respect your position, and think that it is good that someone questions these issues.

[lucifire]

I think it is the responsibility of everyone to think these things through for themselves, and to publicise their concerns, to encourage ethical behaviour.

Exactly my point chatterbox ! and thanks for all replies.

[Hells]

To be honest, I can't say that I'm bothered by the ads. I find them highly amusing, but they're not going to make me rush out and get a credit card. I understand that some are influenced by the actors and what they represent, but I can think for myself and decide wether or not it's a good idea in the long run.

I agree everyone has a right to their opinion, so I'm not belittling what anyone has said already. I just think that for my own opinion, it's just a job. Yes it may be controversial, but so is life at times. At the end of the day, whatever Julian may do as an actor will most probably cause offence to someone out there. Wether it be endorsing a product, or playing a controversial role in a movie someone will disagree.

At least it gives us something to talk about

[tutt-sweet]

Well said Hells, I agree entirely!