Alcohol Advertising On Television & In Sport (Merged x1) - Page 3

rdmdog · 19 Jul 2009, 08:42 (Ref:2504072)

Quote:

Originally Posted by pascofi m-sport

If everyone can please cool off for two seconds, maybe i can shine a light on the problem.

If you take note, some alcohol adverts are now using sportsmen and women to teach people how to socialise responsibly. That should count in favour of the alcohol sponsorship.

Plus, if this bill is passed through parliament (led by the "no brain" Senator from Family First), we should start suggesting new sponsors for all sports. This shouldn't be too hard as we had to do the same thing when they banned tobacco sponsorship.

Hopefully, this should ease some of the tension...

Maybe ask Mark Skaife and anyone else who was employed by GMS at the time (or GSR) what their opinion is?

Wont stop me asking my nephew to get me a beer from the fridge will it? What has a bigger effect......

The sponsors you talk about magically coming up with the required funds to replace the Alcohol companies are going to naturally reduce their support of whatever it is now they are sponsoring.

So what do you suggest there pascofi, maybe KFC, HJ's and Macca's can support Motorsport more? Who do you think is next in the firing line of the Doo Gooder mob????

mayhem · 19 Jul 2009, 09:22 (Ref:2504087)

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewsStalker

Some people just can't see beyond the end of their noses. Like it or not, alcohol advertising in sport will stop. The same arguments (for not stopping advertising) were all raised when tobacco advertising was banned - I guess they was successful in preventing the ban from being implemented as well.

Stealthy - YOU may not drink but but I suggest you (and others) do as xrystl suggests - go out and see just what is happening in the real world - not the one you have isolated yourself in because YOU don't drink.

Really? So by that logic, once alcohol advertising ceases, so will the type of incidents xrsystl talks about? Purrrlease.....

NewsStalker · 19 Jul 2009, 09:28 (Ref:2504089)

Quote:

I know exactly what is happening out in the 'real' world. People making their own decisions.

Perhaps the powers that be should stop trying to make those decisions for people. If someone chooses to smoke, knowingly giving themselves a greater chance of getting lung cancer, so be it. Same with Alcohol, if someone wants to drink, and risks all the diseases related to it, then that is their choice.

And once again, you aren't seeing past the end of your nose.

Smoking doesn't just harm the smoker, it also harms those around the smoker.

Similarly with alcohol and drugs - the people more often 'damaged' the most are the victims of these substances NOT the users.

BTW - anyone here up for a fishing trip? It's been nice the past few days!

STEALTHY · 19 Jul 2009, 10:24 (Ref:2504113)

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewsStalker

And once again, you aren't seeing past the end of your nose.

Smoking doesn't just harm the smoker, it also harms those around the smoker.

Similarly with alcohol and drugs - the people more often 'damaged' the most are the victims of these substances NOT the users.

BTW - anyone here up for a fishing trip? It's been nice the past few days!

What are we talking about? Sponsorship by Beverage companies, or what an irresponsible person does with their product?

Fact is, NOTHING will change without the sponsorship on the side of abusive alcoholic parent, if there isn't advertising. So that side of the argument is null.

On the smoking side of it, smoking is banned in most places now. What someone chooses to do in their own home should never be any of your business. If you have a friend who smokes, and you don't want to breath in 2nd hand smoke, 'make a decision' and not go to said persons house, maybe invite them to yours, and when said person wants a smoke, they can go outside away from you to do it.

Personally i consider all of them drugs (illicit drugs, alcohol, and cigarettes), and ALL should be banned completely, OR all should be completely legal. Infact, i'll go as far as saying there are more deaths caused by alcohol than smoking weed.

Also, fishing will be next on the cards. People like yourself (who seem to be 'for' this type of thing) are setting this country on a path where everything is controlled by the government. Not a place i want to live. I like the freedom to do what you want, when you want. The only thing thats needs changing is the drink driving laws, 11 DUI convictions and someone can still get behind the wheel, what a joke.

NewsStalker · 19 Jul 2009, 10:37 (Ref:2504117)

Looks like I caught a 100 pounder - hook, line and sinker.

1-0

(If you don't like the laws here then you may as well start planning your move. China sounds like you would fit in quite well

)

mayhem · 19 Jul 2009, 11:07 (Ref:2504130)

STEALTHY · 19 Jul 2009, 11:12 (Ref:2504133)

Quote:

Originally Posted by mayhem

My bad, i thought he was bringing up genuine concerns.

mayhem · 19 Jul 2009, 11:17 (Ref:2504134)

He's just admitted he was deliberately 'fishing'. FWIW I agree with your posts 100%.

STEALTHY · 19 Jul 2009, 11:25 (Ref:2504136)

Quote:

Originally Posted by mayhem

He's just admitted he was deliberately 'fishing'. FWIW I agree with your posts 100%.

Whilst it was clear he was fishing, it still seems like its a genuine post, to a point.

Bevan-L · 19 Jul 2009, 13:58 (Ref:2504197)

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdmdog

Maybe ask Mark Skaife and anyone else who was employed by GMS at the time (or GSR) what their opinion is?

Gibson Motor Sport took a big hit when Winfield could no longer sponsor them due to the ciggie ban, remember the car changed colours throughout the year, from plain red, to white and sega sponsorship to red/black/white and coopers sponsorship/<insert some random sponsor to take part in the round> etc to just not running at the event.

NewsStalker · 19 Jul 2009, 20:02 (Ref:2504334)

To clarify for those that are myoptic.

The points I raised ARE genuine issues however, there are some in here who will argue tooth and nail regardless of the reality of the situation. It was becoming obvious that those posters can't differentiate between the real world and noddy-land.

This issue IS going to become bigger and more heated - not just on forums. And people are going to have to realise that (where's the soapbox?) 'This DEMON drink will be the downfall of ALL humanity!' (I'm sure some can put the western style drawl to that statement). And whilst alcohol as a substance affects not only the person using it, but generally the innocent parties more, it is going to be targetted by politiciens, social welfare groups and increasingly by the medical fraternity. Anything they can do to decrease its iimpact is going to be tried.

NewsStalker · 19 Jul 2009, 20:04 (Ref:2504338)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bevan-L

Gibson Motor Sport took a big hit when Winfield could no longer sponsor them due to the ciggie ban, remember the car changed colours throughout the year, from plain red, to white and sega sponsorship to red/black/white and coopers sponsorship/<insert some random sponsor to take part in the round> etc to just not running at the event.

Lack of foresight on Gibson's prt for not llining up a sponsor well before the (known) ban was to come into effect? (Yeah, sure - they couldn't find a sponsor - that should read, they couldn't find one as big as Winfield and wouldn't settle for multiple sponsors to bridge the gap).

NewsStalker · 19 Jul 2009, 20:07 (Ref:2504341)

Quote:

The sponsors you talk about magically coming up with the required funds to replace the Alcohol companies are going to naturally reduce their support of whatever it is now they are sponsoring.

Which suggests, then, that something has to give doesn't it?

Maybe the cost of the so-called 'sport' is becoming incresaingly too high and the overall concept will need to change.

But, of course, we can't have that, can we? I mean - we can't force the team to design and build to using, say, 100 litres of fuels per 250km race and only 8 tyres when they currently use (plucking figures out of the air) 200 litres and 12 tyres.

rdmdog · 19 Jul 2009, 20:12 (Ref:2504344)

Hope your daughters don't like their Netball/hockey too much mate, cos it the sports at the other end of the spectrum that will hurt the most.

**GTRMagic** · 19 Jul 2009, 21:38 (Ref:2504449)

Is this the next industry to be targeted??

STEALTHY · 20 Jul 2009, 02:26 (Ref:2504556)

Quote:

Originally Posted by NewsStalker

To clarify for those that are myoptic.

The points I raised ARE genuine issues however, there are some in here who will argue tooth and nail regardless of the reality of the situation. It was becoming obvious that those posters can't differentiate between the real world and noddy-land.

So your standing by that alcohol consumption with reduce once the sponsers are banned from advertising in sport?

I lol'd.

Its clear who is in noddy land here.

peckstar · 20 Jul 2009, 02:37 (Ref:2504557)

stealthy, cigarette smoking has reduced since advertsing bans came in (along with other measures)

so therefore there is evidence to support that reasoning.

what are you basing your reasoning on?

**GTRMagic** · 20 Jul 2009, 02:44 (Ref:2504558)

Interesting article...

Matthew Ronke · 20 Jul 2009, 03:09 (Ref:2504564)

Future V8 Drivers could be "Moonshine runners"

STEALTHY · 20 Jul 2009, 03:34 (Ref:2504572)

Quote:

Originally Posted by peckstar

stealthy, cigarette smoking has reduced since advertsing bans came in (along with other measures)

so therefore there is evidence to support that reasoning.

what are you basing your reasoning on?

Thats news to me.

What year was the smoking ban put on sport? because there are still a ****load of people who smoke. I really don't get it, if people are that stupid with their money, and just do what advertising says, why don't i make a company called 'give me your money, and in return you get nothing', if its advertised enough people will do it seemingly by your theory (that they only smoked, because the ads told them to, they all stopped after it wasn't allowed to be advertised anymore

)

It will be the same with drinking. Do you seriously know anyone who will change, and not drink during bathurst (watching at home) just because theres no acohol ads on? If you do, your more delusional than i thought.

DAVID PATERSON · 20 Jul 2009, 03:46 (Ref:2504574)

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEALTHY

Thats news to me.

What year was the smoking ban put on sport? because there are still a ****load of people who smoke. I really don't get it, if people are that stupid with their money, and just do what advertising says, why don't i make a company called 'give me your money, and in return you get nothing', if its advertised enough people will do it seemingly by your theory (that they only smoked, because the ads told them to, they all stopped after it wasn't allowed to be advertised anymore

)

It will be the same with drinking. Do you seriously know anyone who will change, and not drink during bathurst (watching at home) just because theres no acohol ads on? If you do, your more delusional than i thought.

Cigarette advertising was banned in the mid '90s. The government recently released statistics which said that the number of adults who smoke has dropped from over 50% to just 20%.

There's a very similar thread on the Biante forum where people have pointed out that the effect of these advertising bans is felt gradually over decades.

STEALTHY · 20 Jul 2009, 03:48 (Ref:2504575)

Thats the good thing about statistics. What they wouldn't tell you, is the population has increased, making it 'seem' like theres a reduction.

sizzle · 20 Jul 2009, 05:05 (Ref:2504590)

Quote:

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Interesting article...

Mid strength only was in force at the Townsville 400. That was half the reason they needed more toilets.

**GTRMagic** · 20 Jul 2009, 05:13 (Ref:2504592)

Quote:

Originally Posted by sizzle

Mid strength only was in force at the Townsville 400. That was half the reason they needed more toilets.

Might cure the drought then

manwell · 20 Jul 2009, 05:40 (Ref:2504600)

If cigarette and alcohol sponsorship is so bad it will make me want to take up drinking and smoking, then ban cigarettes and alcohol all together.
Oh yeah, thats right, the goverment pulls in BILLIONS of dollars in taxes from them every year.
So let me see if ive got this correct...... the GOVERNMENT can enjoy the benefit of all the dollars from Alcohol companies/sales, but they dont want any of the SPORTING codes to benefit from them.
Hmmmmmm...... hypocritical much????

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Lakeside Raceway IS GO!! (Merged x1)	lakesideguy	Australasian Touring Cars.	101	28 Jul 2009 23:43
pre-season tests? (Merged x1)	Pro Racer	Australasian Touring Cars.	35	11 Mar 2009 13:10
NZV8's - Set for a shake-up?? (Merged x1)	Just Do It!	Australasian Touring Cars.	50	18 Aug 2007 11:41
NLR / PWR / ??r...??? (MERGED X1)	GtiMagic	Australasian Touring Cars.	47	22 Jul 2007 10:25
Is alcohol advertising banned in F1 ?	darcym	Formula One	29	10 Jul 2003 08:11