Very strange Bell Ad.:

[Liberal In Texas]

The ad, which appeared in the National Journal, depicts troops dropping down from a hovering tilt-rotor aircraft onto a mosque. Bell Helicopter said the ad should have never gone to print in the first place.

So we can't release the Abu Ghraib pictures becuase it might hurt our "image" and that it would inflame the Arab world, but running an ad from a private corporation showing a US attack on a mosque seems to be OK. Bell, catching shit, said basically, "Our bad," and withdrew it. But really.

http://www.dfw.com/mld/dfw/business/12787079.htm

[spindrifter]

1. They had to pull that piece

of sh*t and admit that it was tasteless, offensive, contemptible.

[tuvor]

2. Tantamount to encouraging terrorist attacks in the USA.

Mind you, that would only result in more contracts for Bell, wouldn't it?

Maybe it wasn't a mistake after all.

[Liberal In Texas]

4. Good point. They could sell more V-22's! n/t

[Bernardo de La Paz]

3. Never underestimate how utterly devoid of intelligence these people can be

Clueless. Arrogant and completely clueless.

So many levels of review to get this ad printed in a national magazine and it still goes through. They think they are being patriotic and they are shooting themselves and the country in the foot.

[Liberal In Texas]

9. They were only sorry when they got called on it. Yes, it must have gone

through many levels of approval before it was sent to the printers. How would the wingers feel if troops were repelling onto the roof of a christian church?

Stupid.

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

43. Absolutely

If you do an ad for Pantene, umpty million P&G'ers have to approve the way the model's hair swirls around. If your client is an Olympics sponsor, you have to add six weeks to the production schedule to give the Olympics review committee enough time to comment on their logo size and placement.

But something like this, that could anger Muslims and risk lives? Everyone signs off on it. Arrogant and clueless is the only explanation.

[Trillo]

5. Psyops at work. nt

[Nikki Stone 1]

6. With what goal?

?

[Trillo]

10. Goal? Intent? Only those who directed the drawing of the advertisement

would know for sure.

What I see in it is psychological programming that's likely below most people's conscious awareness levels. Flip the the paper, journal, perhaps just glance at it while looking for other content, and the sub-conscious mind would register the image but the conscious mind wouldn't, whereas, the conscious mind might notice the message when deliberately concentrating on or looking directly at the image.

Years ago it was claimed that movie theater operators would flash popcorn and soft drinks in a single frame (36 frames per second?) prior to or even during the showing of a movie in order to boost popcorn and drink sales in the lobby.

I think this ad is likely similar. It appears designed to convey a message that is anti-American and anti-U.S., since the First Amendment conveys a right for all religions to exist in peaceable assembly. It appears to be a message of the acceptance of military invasion coupled with a clever play on words that is likely also designed to draw attention away from the image itself.

[Liberal In Texas]

11. Film 24 fps. Video 30 fps.

It has never been proven to work, but there was so much controversy over it, it was made illegal.

Otherwise, I think you are correct about the idea that it is pure propaganda.

[Usrename]

21. Sublimimimimnal - according to the idiot son.

Remember the Democrats - Rats ad during the 2000 campaign. This ad here is photo shopped, right?

[Liberal In Texas]

22. Had to be photo shopped, I don't think the Osprey works that good yet.

Bell and Boeing are pouring so much (of our) $ into the program they'll MAKE it work, come hell or high water. Right.

It's kind of like the airships of the last decade. Nice idea, but pretty dangerous.

[ContraBass Black]

39. "coupled with a clever play on words"

That's far more clumsy than clever.

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

44. You give ad people too much credit

Subliminal advertising has been proven to sell only books about subliminal advertising.

[Straight Shooter]

7. They need to clear out the pre-pubescents in the advertising dept.

Seriously. What tripe.

[shenmue]

8. Ugh

Dumb!

:crazy: :dunce:

[Mr_Spock]

12. That ad is "War of the Worlds" strange

There are people in this country that actually spent the time to put an ad like that together and print it? Holy shit!!

[Liberal In Texas]

13. The ad is bizarre on so many levels. The more I look at it, the more

strange it seems. The good guys "descending from heaven" to trash a mosque "unleashing hell".

And obviously it is a Photoshop of some hateful person's wet dream, as this never actually happened.

Inflammatory doesn't even begin to describe it.

(edited for some real bad spelling)

[jmowreader]

14. That's the first frame. They didn't print the second.

Which, of course, is a mosque with a huge fireball coming up from it and the tail of the V-22 sticking straight out of the hole it made in the roof when it did what V-22s do best...

[Liberal In Texas]

15. HA HA HA...That's why they had to photoshop the pic!

:rofl:

[Mr_Spock]

16. kick

check it out.

[Liberal In Texas]

17. Thanks Mr_Spock...

And here is a shameless recommend request.

:eyes:

[Mr_Spock]

18. Done

Yer on Greatest now :D

[Liberal In Texas]

19. Everyone, you're the best!

:toast:

I think that's my first one ever!

[Solon]

20. Wouldn't it have been more accurate to have...

the Osprey crash into the Mosque, with the words "Mission Accomplished" displayed underneath?

I had a buddy in the Marines, and he simply called it the twirling deathtrap.

[ContraBass Black]

38. That's what I was thinking.

I certainly wouldn't rope drop from one.

Do they even use anything that unreliable in combat?

[Solon]

41. The Bradley before the 100 billion dollar redesign? n/t

[MADem]

23. They have been working on that fucking death helo since the Shah ruled

It was called the BELL 222 back then, and in all these decades, they still have not gotten from concept to reality. And it KILLS MARINES. And they STILL do not have the fucking bugs worked out, I do not care which bigwigs ride in the goddamn thing on carefully controlled flights (which will not happen on the battlefield).

Don't ride in one if you can avoid it. It is a death machine.

Stay and die, for BHI!!! (Bell Helicopter International)

[Liberal In Texas]

26. No, it's always been the V-22. The Bell 222 is this:

A twin turbine noisy piece of expensive aircraft. Mostly used for medi-vac.

A 222 flies over my house all the time, and it is really loud.

[MADem]

27. They changed the name to protect the guilty

I saw BHI concept drawings years back, that called the VSTOL thingy that looked just like that flying deathtrap the 222. Swear on the Constitution....

Started out as the XV-3 project, has had many numbers over the years... http://www.aiaa.org/tc/vstol/unbuilt/bell_tlt/index2.html

[Liberal In Texas]

29. Thanks for the link. Just bookmarked it. I think the operative thing

here is it was the D-222. The preceding letter before the numbers makes the difference.

It's funny though, when I go to the HAI (Helicopters Association International) to drool at the helicopters, Bell always has a separate exhibit from their main one about the civilian applications of the VTOL craft. It's now called the Bell 609.

What's funny is, they STILL do not have a demonstrator that can fly! They have full sized mock-ups on the floor, but nothing that they can take potential buyers for a ride in. (Not that anybody in their right mind would want to.)

The idea behind the civilian version is to be able to take a large cargo (passengers) from a helipad on top of a skyscraper in Dallas to a similar helipad in Houston faster than a helicopter can. Also, the oil rig shuttle isn't lost on them.



These are experimental prototypes and may work one day, but at what cost?

[MADem]

31. Yeah, how many more will have to die?

I'm no engineer, but they just do not have it right yet. They can fly the things under very controlled, level conditions, but any jinking around and they end up eating the dirt or the ocean. And we all know that life, as well as flight, is not always straight, controlled and level....

[Liberal In Texas]

32. Yes sir. As I recall from the HAI in Dallas when they had one here,

They flew it in daily from the Bell HQ in Fort Worth and on one day, the weather was kind of dicey and the real helicopters had no problem, but Bell left the tilt-rotor home.

On another day when it was there, I was able to get out on the helipad (atop the Dallas convention center) with a press pass and a camera ostensibly to take some pictures, and was just amazed with the "experimental" stencils on the side, the explosive bolts, the ejection seats. When it flew, it was a thing of beauty. So was the Hindenburg.

Yes, I think many more "volunteers" from our military will die until they get this thing fixed.



-Dallas Vertiport- on final.

--As a personal bit of self-aggrandizement, I've landed a helicopter on the "largest heliport in the country". (The Dallas Convention Center) What a rush.--

[Kire]

24. Is this the phone company Bell?

Alexander Graham is rolling in his grave.

[Liberal In Texas]

25. No, this is Bell Textron. Also Boeing is a co-contractor. Mostly Bell

makes helicopters.

I saw one at the HAI (Helicopter Association International) show a few years ago. It's so safe they have ejection seats and explosive canopies.

I'm a reformed helicopter pilot student. Would I fly in it? NO!

[Kire]

40. thanks

I didn't think so, but that was a question begging to be asked.

Regards.

[Marr]

28. Does it say anywhere if the ad was produced by Bell's own

advertising team, or by an external agency they work with? In my experience, only certain types of agencies get these kinds of clients, and they attract a specific type of employee. Morally bankrupt, basically. Same thing happens with tobacco advertisers- there's this line between the people who *will* help them push their crap and people who *won't*, and the people who will are usually pretty fucking stupid and self-centered.

[Liberal In Texas]

30. All I know is that Bell and Boeing proudly put their names in the fine

print. They call themselves "Team Osprey" and have a copyright for both Bell Textron and Boeing.

I have to assume that these large companies have in-house advertising people, and don't farm it out to an agency.

[MADem]

33. I would have to agree with the "in house" assessment

They buy these ads for mags like Defense Weekly and very specific trade publications, geared to Congress, the Executive Branch and, specifically, the DOD. They hire a PAO idiot or two and a general, and that is why the stuff looks as lousy as it does!

[Liberal In Texas]

34. Apparently this ad only appeared in...

... the Sept. 24 issue of National Journal, a political affairs publication.

Political, eh? Pandering to the jingoists.

There's no way to know, off hand, if the ad was a product of an agency or in-house. I'm just guessing in-house.

[MADem]

37. I'll bet half the copies are free

and the lobbyists hand them out when they make their rounds...

[Marr]

35. Oh, they farm alot of it out.

I do that stuff myself. Not defense industry stuff, but things for companies like Sony or Microsoft. Big places farm out all kinds of crap- especially big promotional campaigns.

I would agree with you that this particular ad is an in-house thing though, judging from the total lack of competence. :D

[Liberal In Texas]

36. Actually, the ad is so heavy handed, it might be agency work.

I don't think an in-house guy would have pasted a pic of the Osprey up with the rotors not turning. The pic of the aircraft looks like it was taken when the aircraft was on the ground, engines not running.

I do know that large companies frequently farm stuff out when the in-house gets overloaded. It's cheaper than hiring on more staff that might have to be laid off in some future down-turn.

Take your point.

[shenmue]

42. Are these the same people...

who make the helmets for biking and skating?

If so, it seriously puts the hex on me buying their stuff again.

Bastards.

[neweurope]

45. "Unleashing hell" is not "ironic".

The picture is terrible, but so are the words. The whole thing is very cleverly done, up to the fount which looks bleached and old fashioned and is probably supposed to evoke memories of the WW II "good guys". It's totally revolting, and I know that it cannot possibly have been a "mistake". I know how ad campaigns go.

---------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!