Talk:So where the bloody hell are you?/Archive 1

Wow

What an incredible example of daft advertising! 128.195.186.103 14:08, 25 August 2007 (UTC)Adieu

Interesting to me that they objected so much to "bloody" but apparently not at all to "hell".... B7T (talk) 13:56, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Contradictions

from the controversy section:

"The advertisement has also been banned by regulators in Canada and America, owing to the implication of "unbranded alcohol consumption" by the opening line, "We've bought you a beer". There was also concern in Canada at the word 'hell' being used as an expletive. It has been allowed to run with no adverse action in countries such as the United States and New Zealand. In Singapore, the advertisement campaign is presented as "So Where Are You?", with the words "bloody hell" removed."

This paragraph says the article was "banned ... in ... America" in the first sentence, and then says it was run with "no adverse action" in the "Unites States" in the third sentence.

Then, in the "Effectiveness of the campaign" section I find this:

"....although there was a slight increase in tourists from the United States and the People's Republic of China (where the advertisement was not screened)."

Which sounds like either both the US and China didn't air the advertisemen, it was not aired in China but was in the US.

I'm a US citizen but I don't watch TV and I avoid adverts like the plague, so I have no first hand knowledge of if it was ever aired here.(Drn8 (talk) 13:53, 29 May 2009 (UTC))