The European Advertising Standards Alliance in action

Visual Novel Community Off Topic
#1

Two days ago, The Italian branch of the European Advertising Standards Alliance struck again. Although Oliviero Toscani is (in)famous for his often controversial advertising campaigns, our IAP ignored even his most blasphemous photos, focalizing its efforts against the true menaces to society and public morals instead: this photo, for example, from Toscani’s new advertising campaign for Nolita Pocket (a chain of shops selling clothes for children. Note: the Italian section contains the most nice Collection Photos).
In particular, the IAP denounced “this half-naked, sad female child forcedly masked as an adult” and practically turned into an explicit sexual object “capable of upsetting/disturbing a casual observer” because of the “unnatural and improper sexuality” of the photo, etc. etc.
Maybe I’m just an old lecher , but I can’t find nothing so unnatural/pervert in the photo, and I’ve sent an eMail in this sense to Nolita Pocket (open the “WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT?” banner and you will find an article in Italian and a SI.NO (YES.NO) choice option: choose YES if you think that that photo is socially dangerous, NO if you find the Italian IAP more dangerous to my nation ).
WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT?

[This message has been edited by Baldo (edited 03-04-2006).]

#2

I was a bit disturbed by the picture, but not because of the girl, but because of the baby. A naked baby doesn’t belong in a promotional picture like that, in my opinion.

#3

I only find it eyebrow-raising because, well, ‘Nolita’ looks so close to ‘Lolita’.

#4
quote:
I only find it eyebrow-raising because, well, 'Nolita' looks so close to 'Lolita'.

That was what I thought as well. The image wasn't really "eye raising"...I mean, I just had my wife look at it and she said "I don't get it, maybe because her shirt is open?"

I understand the sensitivity of child modelling however; there are some really sick examples of it going overboard here. Here is a link covering a great deal of the controversy but there are many more (and worse) examples which I can see are disturbing....

#5

Just to remeber that i’m not dead, just transformed into a lurker.

"Yeah, it was Sooo Sexual! That look! My god that look just makes me have wet deams!
It should be sooo illegal to have a little girl exite me like this!"

This is what might have crossed those peoples mind before stating that it has some kind of (weird)sexual meaning …

#6

Malice is into the observer’s eyes…

[This message has been edited by Italicus (edited 03-16-2006).]

#7

Qui bono? Nolita gets additional promotion for free and world knows even better now that EU clerk never sleeps. All they need to do now is to send nice sum to Afrika or Vatican.

#8

My impressions:
1) The name Nolita struck me as close to Lolita.
2) It does seem kind of odd that she’s holding a naked baby. It seems suggestive that she’s the mother, impossible as that sounds. Really, several aspects of the picture come together to give that feel to it–take away one and the feeling diminishes rapidly. Her clothing, the fact that she’s holding a naked baby, her expression, and the name of the company (hah).

I thought the idea that the photo was sexual was absurd at first. Then I looked at their argument, and I think I understand where they’re coming from. It’s not so much graphically sexual as just outright inappropriate, or “wrong” if you will. The connection between the inappropriateness and it being sexually suggestive is another tentative one, but one that I think could be made. I’m not sure there’s enough in it to start pointing fingers, but like I said, it seems odd. It’s a picture that doesn’t really strike you until stare at it for a bit, perhaps from the angle that it could be suggestive.

[This message has been edited by Dark_Shiki (edited 05-02-2006).]

#9

My mom says it is very cute picture and my mom is always right. IMHO the name Nolita a bit silly, yes. Pic is slightly provocative, as an ad should be, what can we do. I would not place it on gigaboard near freeway then surely. Too dangerous. But guys, those kids ar just innocent!

#10

I think the innocence of the kid isn’t in question so much as the innocence of the viewers…

#11
quote:
Originally posted by Dark_Shiki:
I think the innocence of the kid isn't in question so much as the innocence of the viewers...

...right... also those who think using kids and babies in ads is controversial.

There was local tv commercial where little girl used her doll as a weapon to get biscuit out of lady's hand (she hit the car to blow up airbag paralysing the lady inside. took the cracker and went healing poor 'injured' doll). Many women protested - found it sooo brutal.

Most popular local tv ad (having even fan club) has story of couple entering asian restaurant with their dog. Young lady kindly asks waiter to take care of it. Later on she screams and colapses when proud cook serves her the dog-darling on silver plate (baked)... The message was meant to be 'better go where they speak your leanguage', promoting local web portal, but none really noticed that (emotional reaction/laughter was so strong that final message got missed. anyway, story was over, so what to wait for?). So, main dispute was about wether the ad served its purpose if promoted company remained unnoticed (paradogsically the ad survived the company).

Ads are really interesting mirror of cultures, sometimes fun, sometimes art. Big global branches have problem to believe our local ad producers that simply translating what worked in country A, does not mean, it will touch people in country B, with slightly different mentality, too. Yes, people are basicly the same, but...

Might be also interesting (for Jungians) to find out how likely some could see this 'couple' as madonna with baby... i mean, perhaps some religious feelings touched too, who knows.


[This message has been edited by offtopicalist (edited 05-03-2006).]

[This message has been edited by offtopicalist (edited 05-03-2006).]

#12