Comments on: IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE TO THEM http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/2009/11/it-makes-perfect-sense-to-them/ Creative thinking and critique from Dave Trott Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:41:30 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1 hourly 1 By: dave http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/2009/11/it-makes-perfect-sense-to-them/#comment-22350 dave Mon, 30 Nov 2009 13:50:34 +0000 http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/?p=502#comment-22350 Hi Chris, You're right, those examples do predate Clearcast. They're either ITCA or BACC. Also you're right about something else too. Like everything else, it works better when we work together. The most helpful people were always the ones who would sit and discuss the scripts over a coffee. Once we understood each other's position, we usually got something better as a result. Reasonable people are nearly always capable of compromise once they understand each other's concerns. Hi Chris,
You’re right, those examples do predate Clearcast.
They’re either ITCA or BACC.
Also you’re right about something else too.
Like everything else, it works better when we work together.
The most helpful people were always the ones who would sit and discuss the scripts over a coffee.
Once we understood each other’s position, we usually got something better as a result.
Reasonable people are nearly always capable of compromise once they understand each other’s concerns.

]]> By: Chris Mundy http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/2009/11/it-makes-perfect-sense-to-them/#comment-22341 Chris Mundy Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:44:58 +0000 http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/?p=502#comment-22341 Hi Dave, I run Clearcast so hope you’ll let me chuck in a couple of points on a good read. The first point to make, which you’ll know but some of your readers may not, is that UK advertising is self-regulated by the industry and the TV rules are made not by Clearcast but by BCAP. BCAP is made up of representatives of the advertisers, agencies and broadcasters. The alcohol rules that we apply are based on industry consultation and consensus. Clearcast’s role is to work with agencies to get ads on air ensuring that they meet the BCAP rules. Again, for people not familiar with the setup, we are owned by the commercial broadcasters and help them meet a licence obligation that all ads are pre-cleared against the rules before they are broadcast. Inevitably, some of the decisions that we make are qualitative in nature. However, they are shaped not just by the rules, but by previous ASA adjudications. In the case of alcohol advertising there is a raft of adjudications, both upheld and not upheld to work with. It’s an area that prompts a lot of complaints, some from consumers and others from pressure groups that would like to ban alcohol advertising altogether. The examples that you cite sound quite old, and may or may not be accurately stated so I’m not going to respond to them as they quite possibly predate Clearcast. However, what they do show is two things: that we worked with you to get your creative treatment to air and that in the event of a complaint both sides would be able to demonstrate proper consideration and account being taken of the codes. The latter point is important, my experience of the vast majority of alcohol advertisers is that they want to ensure they act responsibly and although the clearance process may be a pain for creatives, it does provide comfort to advertisers who don’t want to be named and shamed in Wednesday’s newspapers when adjudications are published. Specifically on the Hardings test, this is applied as an industry response (and now an Ofcom regulation) to a particular ad that caused a photosensitive epileptic reaction amongst a small number of sufferers (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bs0WCUZqoJg if this isn’t you). This is serious stuff if you are a sufferer; if we didn’t flash test you could be unwittingly exposed to content that prompts a photosensitive reaction, and as a result lose your driving licence for two years. The most recent case of this was when broadcasters showed footage of the London 2012 animated logo being launched at a press conference (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6724245.stm). If it makes sense to us it’s because we work with this stuff day in, day out whether that’s reviewing ads against the codes or defending our clearances against ASA complaints. That said, all our decisions are open to discussion and there’s an escalation process if agencies feel we’ve made the wrong call. It can be found on our website here: http://www.clearcast.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/79B6E911-9FA8-4099-B0F1-7DD586354E30/0/ClearanceProceduresJan09080509.pdf . Our role is to help get advertising to air, and keep it there, and we're happy to be held accountable to that. Hi Dave, I run Clearcast so hope you’ll let me chuck in a couple of points on a good read.
The first point to make, which you’ll know but some of your readers may not, is that UK advertising is self-regulated by the industry and the TV rules are made not by Clearcast but by BCAP. BCAP is made up of representatives of the advertisers, agencies and broadcasters. The alcohol rules that we apply are based on industry consultation and consensus.
Clearcast’s role is to work with agencies to get ads on air ensuring that they meet the BCAP rules. Again, for people not familiar with the setup, we are owned by the commercial broadcasters and help them meet a licence obligation that all ads are pre-cleared against the rules before they are broadcast.
Inevitably, some of the decisions that we make are qualitative in nature. However, they are shaped not just by the rules, but by previous ASA adjudications. In the case of alcohol advertising there is a raft of adjudications, both upheld and not upheld to work with. It’s an area that prompts a lot of complaints, some from consumers and others from pressure groups that would like to ban alcohol advertising altogether.
The examples that you cite sound quite old, and may or may not be accurately stated so I’m not going to respond to them as they quite possibly predate Clearcast. However, what they do show is two things: that we worked with you to get your creative treatment to air and that in the event of a complaint both sides would be able to demonstrate proper consideration and account being taken of the codes. The latter point is important, my experience of the vast majority of alcohol advertisers is that they want to ensure they act responsibly and although the clearance process may be a pain for creatives, it does provide comfort to advertisers who don’t want to be named and shamed in Wednesday’s newspapers when adjudications are published.
Specifically on the Hardings test, this is applied as an industry response (and now an Ofcom regulation) to a particular ad that caused a photosensitive epileptic reaction amongst a small number of sufferers (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bs0WCUZqoJg if this isn’t you). This is serious stuff if you are a sufferer; if we didn’t flash test you could be unwittingly exposed to content that prompts a photosensitive reaction, and as a result lose your driving licence for two years. The most recent case of this was when broadcasters showed footage of the London 2012 animated logo being launched at a press conference (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6724245.stm).
If it makes sense to us it’s because we work with this stuff day in, day out whether that’s reviewing ads against the codes or defending our clearances against ASA complaints. That said, all our decisions are open to discussion and there’s an escalation process if agencies feel we’ve made the wrong call. It can be found on our website here: http://www.clearcast.co.uk/NR/rdonlyres/79B6E911-9FA8-4099-B0F1-7DD586354E30/0/ClearanceProceduresJan09080509.pdf .
Our role is to help get advertising to air, and keep it there, and we’re happy to be held accountable to that.

]]> By: vinny warren http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/2009/11/it-makes-perfect-sense-to-them/#comment-21626 vinny warren Tue, 24 Nov 2009 00:59:17 +0000 http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/?p=502#comment-21626 jesus, the "harding test". shudder! jesus, the “harding test”. shudder!

]]> By: Ciaran McCabe http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/2009/11/it-makes-perfect-sense-to-them/#comment-21619 Ciaran McCabe Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:56:08 +0000 http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/?p=502#comment-21619 Very good point, John. Ciaran Very good point, John.
Ciaran

]]> By: john w. http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/2009/11/it-makes-perfect-sense-to-them/#comment-21618 john w. Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:22:08 +0000 http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/?p=502#comment-21618 Dave It sounds like you're getting your Celine Dion's mixed up with your Whitney Houston's. I'd check if you put the right record back in the right sleeve if I were you. Dave
It sounds like you’re getting your Celine Dion’s mixed up with your Whitney Houston’s.
I’d check if you put the right record back in the right sleeve if I were you.

]]> By: Dave Trott http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/2009/11/it-makes-perfect-sense-to-them/#comment-21601 Dave Trott Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:46:56 +0000 http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/?p=502#comment-21601 Hi Lucy, That's reinforced my blokey credentials. Hi Lucy,
That’s reinforced my blokey credentials.

]]> By: lucy http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/2009/11/it-makes-perfect-sense-to-them/#comment-21600 lucy Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:41:55 +0000 http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/?p=502#comment-21600 Sorry Dave, fantastic blog, but the Celine Dion track is My Heart Will Go On. Just for the record. Sorry Dave, fantastic blog, but the Celine Dion track is My Heart Will Go On. Just for the record.

]]> By: ian http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/2009/11/it-makes-perfect-sense-to-them/#comment-21581 ian Mon, 23 Nov 2009 14:16:45 +0000 http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/?p=502#comment-21581 I know the BACC's bad. But one time, I was doing some work for a semi-fundamentalist Asian country. The client was for a camera. And the concept involved cowboys. But the rules were "no blue jeans". Really. Because bj (blue jeans) are a sign of American decadence. But jeans in any other colour was fine. So we had the cowboys in brown, black and dirty jeans. Plus, their equivalent of the BACC met once every 2 months. So if your script was rejected, then you waited another 2 months minimum. To borrow a Bachman Turner Overdrive/Grubb/Waters TV spot, "You ain't seen nothing". I know the BACC’s bad. But one time, I was doing some work for a semi-fundamentalist Asian country. The client was for a camera. And the concept involved cowboys. But the rules were “no blue jeans”. Really. Because bj (blue jeans) are a sign of American decadence. But jeans in any other colour was fine. So we had the cowboys in brown, black and dirty jeans.
Plus, their equivalent of the BACC met once every 2 months. So if your script was rejected, then you waited another 2 months minimum.
To borrow a Bachman Turner Overdrive/Grubb/Waters TV spot, “You ain’t seen nothing”.

]]> By: Kevin Gordon http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/2009/11/it-makes-perfect-sense-to-them/#comment-21579 Kevin Gordon Mon, 23 Nov 2009 12:33:34 +0000 http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/?p=502#comment-21579 Hi Dave, It's absolutely insane isn't it. I guess your neighbours could have claimed Acid Rain damages the artefacts whereas seawater is closest to Plasma by content, and therefore "Refreshes the passenger ships other waters cannot reach." Worth a try for a few quid. Hi Dave,

It’s absolutely insane isn’t it. I guess your neighbours could have claimed Acid Rain damages the artefacts whereas seawater is closest to Plasma by content, and therefore “Refreshes the passenger ships other waters cannot reach.” Worth a try for a few quid.

]]> By: Dave Trott http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/2009/11/it-makes-perfect-sense-to-them/#comment-21578 Dave Trott Mon, 23 Nov 2009 12:11:52 +0000 http://www.cstadvertising.com/blog/?p=502#comment-21578 Ben, Ah yes, The Harding Test. There's now a whole new department at post-prod facilities. Plus an expert with expensive equipment. Ben,
Ah yes, The Harding Test.
There’s now a whole new department at post-prod facilities.
Plus an expert with expensive equipment.

]]>