Guest post: Adam Hunt: All discrimination is ugly – that’s why I made the Gruen ad

well said, Adam. well said.

I look forward to seeing this, and engaging in the debate.
Good on you Adam for sticking to your beliefs about doing an ad which affects real behavioural change.

Well done Adam. Lets hope that people take the trouble to think about what is behind the ad, rather than simply writing it off.

‘The Gruen Transfer’ is by in large a comedy show. So I don’t think the brief to make an ad for ‘The Pitch’ is ever really please get on soap box and actually attempt to end an issue with a hard hitting ad. You mention the NZ invasion ad – you saw the comedy aspect of that, why couldn’t you here? Oh “It was a serious proposition about a serious topic”. I think you’ve missed the point of the show.

what?
I think it’s you that’s missed the point mate.
There can never be a serious side to invading NZ, whereas discriminating against someone on the basis of their shape is not funny at all.
It’s about being on brief.
The Gruen Transfer is often entertaining, but it’s just as often thought provoking.
Sometimes the brief is to invade NZ, other times it’s to end discrimination.

Adam,

look forward to viewing both the ad and the 15 minute debate. Warhol only predicted we each get 15 seconds of fame, you’ve managed to guarantee the fat discrimination issue a more extended spotlight. Well done on that front.
Alex.

It’s interesting that the SMH etc say the ad is so offensive, yet republish the offensive jokes themselves…

So Adam’s ad is off because it is deemed ‘offensive’ by the same network who supports artists like Chris Lilley and his character’s discrimination against the ‘ranga’? Apparently in that instance they assume the audience will understand the artist’s intention, thereby alleviating any perceived offense, yet in Adam’s case they think we’re not up to the same task?

I can’t wait to see it Adam, I have no doubt this will be the raging debate of the week. Hopefully it may even highlight the real issue of persistent abuse and humiliation that many fat people genuinely suffer.

Adam, well done on once again having the balls to say exactly what you think. In a world where too many people pussy-foot around taboo subjects, you always say it as is – often to your detriment. It’s amazing the word-of-mouth that 30 seconds of controversy can create. Even before anybody’s seen this ad, it’s getting tongues wagging, which can’t be a bad thing for any cause. Surely the biggest crime in advertising is to have an ad go comletely unnoticed. Mate, I look forward to seeing the ad tonight. All the best, Skip.

how you manage to still be a trouble maker and right at the same time is truly a new level for you

This is exactly the reaction ads are hoped to have – to generate interest. Bet you wish it was for a paying client. Great advertising for Aunty. Love the show and looking forward to tonight’s.

I must be doing something wrong – I cant seem to access the website where this ad can be viewed?
does anyone have a link that works?

Well said but I cant help but think….the other team managed to put together an amusing take on the issue and won the vote 3-1 on the night. So maybe it was possible to look at it differently.

Still, Auntie shouldnt have censored it.

This is an exquisite ad Adam. It is compelling in the totally unmediated delivery of really ugly sentiments. Clearly many think like this and it is so confronting to hear everyday people say the unbelievable stuff they’re thinking. An arctic blast of reality.

Just managed to see the ad. Pity a) I had to google 3 different sites before finding it and b) that Zapruder felt the need to make the site so Flash-heavy. But these are quibbles.

I’m VERY fat, this sort of disgusting prejudice against fat people exists (ever had someone yell out a car window mocking your weight?), and I spend some of my time online challenging it. This is a great ad, I hope it gets shown properly on TV.

More gutlessness from the ABC – they’ll keep on showing programmes with only pretty, thin actors, but pretend that this ad is unfit for broadcast.

Well done.

BTW the ad is at http://www.antiprejudicead.net – if you use Ad Block Pro, you’ll need to turn it off to see the “Enter” button.

It makes the ad that won on the night look somewhat trite by comparison

I thought the ad was exactly what it should be, challenging and thought provoking. Any ad that portrays marginal behavior is going to challenge public perception and this ad will definitely make discriminators think about what they are really saying, and where they are really placed in society.

Brave work Adam and well done.

If there’s a problem with the pitch segment is that every agency goes for a laugh. You don’t get many serious attempts to hit the brief.

I’d love to see this get on air.

@manandre, I’m not so sure the ad will make anti-fat bigots think. What it *does* do is let fat people know that they are not alone, and other people don’t think it’s OK for them to be abused.

The more people know they are not alone, the more they will speak up when this crap happens. I was taking part in the discussion mentioned in this blog post today, and it’s good to send a clear signal that you can’t just mock fat people and expect to be heard in silence.

Very well said Adam. I agree completely, and I think the ad is an incredibly effective piece of communication. I can’t be bothered rahashing the same things I said, so I just copied and pasted this from my post on the antiprejudice.net website:

Well, of course it’s confrontational! As Adam said, it’s a lot harder to change peoples thoughts than it is to change the brand of beer they buy. Paradigm shifts don’t just happen overnight, they need to be prompted by something, and this ad forces one to think about the attitudes they hold and whether they’re acceptable or not.
It’s nice to see someone be serious about the pitch for a change instead of going for the cheap laugh. I applaud Adam and the Foundry for this ad – it’s certainly made me think more about the things I say about fat people.

@ djackmanson. I think it will (would) make discriminators see themselves in a different light, similar to the ‘pinky’ campaign shamed speeding drivers.

The jokes may keep coming, but their friends will stop laughing as loud and they will eventually either admit they are a bigot and move on or bend their wit.

This is absolutely amazing for those of us who have been slogging away at ending fat discrimination for years. If I had bunches of money I’d buy air time to show this ad on all stations, in all cities and locales.

So, THIS piece of art-plus-message-plus-eefective branding of anti-bigotry gets pulled from the show, but the *more* offensive piece-of-derivative-crap PSA about sexual molest got through?

When this ad, which was pulled, seems to *more* effectively advocate Aunty’s ant-prejudice motif than Aunty “herself”?

And MY tax dollars paid for such incompetance on the part of the “censors”?

Does the freedom of information act allow us to know the name of the censor in question so we can make a direct statement to him/her on vimeo and/or youtube?

I mean, if 25 years ago, there’d been a graphic video of “Sharman’s Boxers” by Midnight Oil, would the current Aunty be banning that, or would Petey’s Ministry make that a conflict of interest? Would that have been disallowed?

What’s the bet the person who refused The Gruen the right to show the ad was a bulemic breadstick?

i agree totally with Todd Sampson: “you dont need to offend one group to help another”.

@manandre I hope you’re right there. I tend to assume that people don’t want to give up their bigotry – but if I’m wrong then the ad would be even more effective.

And even if I am right, letting fat people know they have support is a great thing to do.

Mission: Big Success!

Adam, good job. The one thing that has come out of this is that everyone is talking about it. Everyone is aware that discrimination is wrong!!! And those discussions and debates around that are now fueled by an ad that got banned that you created.

Your ad being banned was probably the best thing that could of happened, in the way that you set out to show that discrimination is real and should be taken very seriously and that is exactly what the ABC has done.

JD

remove the whole debate and controversy and look at this as an answer to a brief.

If this ad ran without the subsequent debate/explanation i think people wouldn’t take anything clear out of it nor connect the sentiment/statements in the ad to the purpose.

The ad is offensive but isnt that the point. All the jokes are offensive but the point to me is that as a society we cant be offensive to some but its ok to be offensive to others. Maybe its not the sort of thing to air on TV but if that is the case then there are many other subjects that should not be shown either.

Now, my username here, out of context, is offensive.

Unless you’re a little man who wants to row a boat around the Great Barrier Reef in 40 years time.

Then it’s not.

How offensive something “is” depends entirely on its context. A mere apostrophe – one keystroke – changes a context, thus the semiotic, just like a raised eyebrow changes the memetic (semiotics and memetics are both terms I’m sure Adam is quite familiar with). “Its”, with no apostrophe, is the possessive of a non-human.

Add one keystroke and suddenly it’s the basis for a whole subgenre or comedy routine, or genuinely apt public service announcement.

“It’s life, Jim, but not as we know it…” (from Star Trekking, the comedy clip).

Thus, you can support PART of Adam’s ad, and the media-buzz it’s getting, without supporting its individual attributes as a gang, wholecloth (to use both its/it’s in context).

I’m supporting the “ad” wholecloth, since nothing in this life can be supported wholecloth, even some forms of discrimination. Memetics allow genes to discrimnate in their effort to reproduce and
pre-dominate, based on looks and physical attributes, and if this were not the case no woman – size 2 or 12 or 20 – would have the ability to drool over Brad Pitt or Hugh Jackman, no men – belt size 35 or 53 – would be able to stuggle through through the whingely-crap on Law and Order SVU unless Memes had made sure Jane Mansfield was selective by dint of looks thus yielding her daughter, Mariska Hargitay, whom has been the only reason for men – queer or hetero – to watch THAT show.

But there acceptable degrees, there is ‘pushing the envelop’, as any adperson or short film auteur (often the same thing, apologies for breaking THAT fourth wall) will tell you.

In this case, there was only ONE reason to pull the ad.

The fact that the ad ripped the format, shot technique, lighting technique, “ouvre en toto” from previous ads, even the pro red meat featuring women in black and white shown on the *very same Gruen Transfer episode* as that which has spawned this “town hall meeting in Cyberville”.

Frankly all I wanna know right now is if Adam is now hiring creatives with this new buzz he’s got, or will there be a “closed club, by referral do we watch your reel only” discrimination following his
anti-discrimination ad! har har!

Wow, I want some of what Little Man’s on…

“Author: Anon
Comment:
Wow, I want some of what Little Man’s on…”

and see right there, how we speak about an ad that mocks casual derision of someone appearing different or acting different…

and within minutes of posting in a different way, my using some vocabulary versus monosyllabic one-liner retorts that have been regurgitated on the net since the early 90’s merits a discriminatory reply from Anon using the “I don’t need vocabulary” motif.

As per usual in Australia. As per the biggest discrimination we have in this country.

Meathead versus Thinker.

Nice herd-mentality move there, Anon.

Johns would love it, if he still had a job.

Adam, that was nothing short of brilliance! It was a powerful piece, holding a mirror up to the ugliness that is prejudice ( prejudice not just against overweight people, but against a range of physical / cultural / sexual characterisitcs). Whether it should have been banned or not, who cares? Hopefully it’ll get a million views on Youtube and another million on the microsite and seriously change some opinions.

Thanks, and congrats on a powerful piece surrounding a topic that is super-important.

As an educated women who works in the media who goes to the gym four times a week, eats healthily, but is fat, THANK YOU for making this ad.

I’ve written some of my views about all this on my blog. But I have been frustrated for so many years at the inability for people to recognize that size discrimination is just as damaging as other forms of discrimination.

I found the other pitch ad more offensive, as it perpetuated the stereotypes that fat people are gluttons… not necessarily true, just another offensive stereotype for a cheap laugh.

I don’t like the “jew” joke. That’s more than discrimination… it is referring to a truly Horrific circumstance…. where 6 million jews were murdered for no good reason. I think you could argue it is still discrimination… but i think it takes it to a level it didn’t need to be taken. heres the thing… it wasn’t just 6 million jews… Fat, poofters, blacks all went up the chimneys too… you idiot!

This whole debate is upside down. Adam’s competition in The Pitch segment (JWT Melbourne) made an ad that ridiculed fat people. They are the ones who should be copping heat on this, not Adam.

This ad shows how ugly discrimination is, yet JWT is excused for fat jokes because of the comedic style of the program. Go figure…

Puerile garbage masquerading as high brow moral social comment… supported by a rationale from a man with a condom on his head… The notion
of giving oxygen to sexist and racist humour as a means of countering discrimination of another type is laughable…It presumes that the knuckle draggers who perpetuate this type of thing are in some way going to be offended and shocked into remedying their behaviour rather than the most likely response amusement. At best naive at worst delusional

Here’s the thing, it wasn’t just jews that were targeted, the homosexuals were also separated out as well as the gypsies, along with political opponents. If you want to say that overweight people haven’t been treated as badly, while it might be true, it is also irrelevant to the issue that they have been treated badly because of that condition. That is the point, that it is another form of discrimination that is unwarranted. Should all groups that are targeted be required to have millions die before they are heard?!

# Anonmenon
15 May 09
7:55 am

I don’t like the “jew” joke. That’s more than discrimination… it is referring to a truly Horrific circumstance…. where 6 million jews were murdered for no good reason. I think you could argue it is still discrimination… but i think it takes it to a level it didn’t need to be taken. heres the thing… it wasn’t just 6 million jews… Fat, poofters, blacks all went up the chimneys too… you idiot!

Thank you for your pompous comments there anothermous, I’m sure you feel safe in making them from your own moral high ground. Perhaps instead of looking down your nose at everyone (particularly the “knuckle draggers”, as you put it) you should take the time to understand the material that has been put forward, because you clearly don’t get it.

Wow.

Every politician and every free-to-air exec is creaming themselves in their pants/pantsuits right now.

Since clearly people arguing over “merit” have forgotten that advertising cannot – by dint of where the paychecks for advertising come from – accept that “merit” will never have any place in any advertising, even fake “for free” advertising to promote ones’s own advertising company on television.

On a station that disallows “advertising”.

Unless you are making a fake ad about advertising that augments the ratings (and even Aunty needs her ratings, so she can maintain budget). One that gets your ad company LOTS of attention, and probably will generate a lot of potential clients.

Especially after the “Coke does not rot your teeth” fiasco, deliberated on Gruen itself.

This, li’l Childrens, is a prime (or is that “7 Prime”?) example of viral advertising.

Which has been discussed and debated on Gruen before, so any reader of this thread unfamiliar with V.A. can shut the H–L up before offering a reply as braindead as “I want the drugs Little Man is on”.

Only *this* V.A. is 3 times more effective and clever, since Adam is using ANTI -commercial TV that makes FUN of viral adverts on the net to make an ad that is ONLY able to be shown on the net (totally viral) and then get massive buzz for the product…

which is NOT a product…

but Adam himself, his skills, in showing a product CONCEPT.
\
Anti viral to market virally in a non viral environment to spread the advert virus.

Deft, Adam, gorgeously deft.

Not apt, but deft.

God bless you and your hat, which despite previous comments, did not look like a condom.

It looked like one of the hats worn by a secondary character on Fat Albert, but not a condom.

(Choose your deity and insert here, as per all advertising) bless Adam.

http://snipurl.com/i5zmv

And here’s betting “AdGrunt” couldn;t actually draw that pic he/she/it linked us to, nor could right anything catchy to go with it.

But can be a standard meathead and merely swipe someone else’s work.

Nice one, AdGrunt. It exhibits the same “lack of firing neurons” indicative of the drongos that MAKE fat jokes.

One liners stolen from someone else are easy and wort less than a penny on the net. Get back to us when you can actually CREATE something in terms of a reply, you HACK.

Have you only just sobered up?

# Andrew…
Referring to a genocide (a factual event) is not the same as a discriminatory joke attacking a stereotype.
I’m interested to see if you can tell the difference between the jokes
1. Why do Jews like air?… coz it’s free”
Versus the joke used in the ad
2. “What’s the difference b/n Jews and Santa clause?… Santa clause goes down the chimney.”

In context of the ad I would have no argument (wrong as it is) with joke 1 being used. Joke 2 is not the same type of discrimination… It’s NOT discriminating by referring to a stereotype… it was an actuality. And a horrific one. How do you think survivors and family of people who “went up the chimneys” would feel about that ad?
Now… what I said:
Anonmenon: “here’s the thing… it wasn’t just 6 million Jews… Fat, poofters, blacks all went up the chimneys too”
(sorry but I feel I have to spell out for you that I was intentionally using the derogatory names used in the actual ad… just in case)

What you said:
Andrew: “Here’s the thing, it wasn’t just Jews that were targeted, the homosexuals were also separated out as well as the gypsies, along with political opponents”

Sound familiar??… You are arguing my argument… with my argument! So thanks for repeating MY point.

And now to rebut what is by far the most stupid part of your post… Not once did I hint that “Jews” or any other sect are any less deserving of discrimination… and I certainly didn’t suggest that “all groups that are targeted be required to have millions die before they are heard” Are you serious??… YOU IDIOT!

“Have you only just sobered up?”

Sober enough to see you can’t post anything more than cliched one-liners or links to the work of other people, you meat-head hack.

Since you clearly are on par with the same manner of meat-head that makes discriminatory jokes.

Besides which, AdGrunt, if most of the populace was as tired and boring as you, the few creative people left would need to be drunk 24/7 just to cope with YOUR lot.

Now go suck a tinnie and crawl back into your ute and wipe your wet nose on your wifebeater, you Bogan Butthead.

I do love an ad hominem argument with a Blog Troll over my cornflakes.

What was your point again?

well “Buyer” you certainly bought this crock.. by the way I got it… it stank

Ah the shining wit of anothermous returns, this time with some clever wordplay to go with the closed minded arrogance. Bravo.

Instead of coming here an insulting other posters, do you actually have anything constructive to add to the debate? Have you even looked at the JWT ad? Or is that acceptable because, let’s face it, the pitch is all a bit of a laugh really, isn’t it?

I covered my thoughts on this ad on my well-thumbed (not) blog.

In brief, the main forms of discrimination covered in this ad are deemed to be unpalatable by the vast majority of society.

However, ‘shape discrimination’ isn’t widely condemned in western society – therefore a viewer is open to having an adverse reaction to putting shape discrimination on a par with, say, racism.

I watched this ad and disagreed with its premise – I don’t think that someone treated like a second-class citizen for being black, is the same as someone who is laughed-at for being fat.

What would work, is if the ad demonstrated why such discrimination was wrong in the first place – e.g. how it affects ‘sufferers’. Thereby you would create some sort of empathic reaction.

“Buyer” my criticism of the Adam Hunt spot is not an endorsement for the bollocks that JWT dished up… there is no small irony in your attack on me though.. Look at the language you use… “Closed minded… pompous” All because I didn’t find a very silly ad worthwhile… so because I don’t agree with you I am subjected to such abuse… hey maybe Adam Hunt could make an ad about such bigotry??

You gotta love the firefight that always is the result of allowing anonymous comments 🙂

Several CB Bloggers have pointed out that the spot is rather similar to a commercial created by Saatchi & Saatchi Sydney for the United Nations six years ago. It was Nobby’s first spot as CD of Saatchi’s and was directed by Tim Gibbs. http://www.campaignbrief.com/2.....amili.html