StClone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-02-05 09:08 PM
Original message |
Should the U.N. run a U.S. AD blitz? |
|
Edited on Sun Jan-02-05 09:08 PM by StClone
Wouldn't an ad campaign to illustrate the U.N. mission, successes and personalities help enlighten the mis-informed U.S. populace? All Americans hear is that it is a costly, anti-American and corrupt organization when in fact it is not that at all.
Countering the rabid hate speech directed at it from the Right would not be the ad's only scope. It would also offer good will and information on where our money is going.
Who would you contact with this idea in the U.N. to see if this were feasible? The Ad Council could donate resources so there would be no mis-directed resources.
|
SHRED
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-02-05 09:12 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Good idea.
:thumbsup:
I asked a freeper, on a messageboard, why, in detail, he hated the UN. I got nothing in response. These idiots just hear the dittomouths and repeat like a bunch of mina birds.
|
DireStrike
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-02-05 09:14 PM
Response to Original message |
|
The U.N. is not an organization to be "for or against". By advertising it will further turn itself into an issue. I think it's better to just smack down anti-UN positions when they crop up.
Better to weed, than to spray in this case. IMO.
|
StClone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-02-05 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. As an informational ad |
|
I tend to disagree. Our money goes to the UN and that should be related to the mushroom masses here. Being on the fire offensive is more important in my mind than putting out spot fires and hope no further damage is done. Get Preemptive!
|
DireStrike
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-02-05 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. It definitely has potential. I'm just worried about backlash. |
|
This is the sort of thing that has profile. There's no concerted Anti-UN movement that I'm aware of right now. That could change once partisans catch wind of it.
With the current media atmosphere, I think there would be more coverage by partisans and pseudo news agencies repeating what is said by the partisans, than what is actually true.
And, going on the offensive by putting ads forward gives them targets to rake muck on. Whatever we say can be scoffed at, rationalized away, or just plain lied over.
We're not gonna change any partisan minds, but the question is what sort of effects would introducing this new variable into our volatile situation produce?
|
StClone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-02-05 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
Could study the merits of your arguments but I can't see how a strong, well-crafted, well-researched and visible ad campaign could be turned negative.
Why do liars like the discredited SBV ads have an impact yet believing positive ads couldn't counter negativity when that is the preemptive goal.
|
Deja Q
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Jan-02-05 09:49 PM
Response to Original message |
5. The M$M has disallowed others to put up ads and programs. |
|
If the M$M wants the public kept as misinformed as possible, they'll just refuse the UN, regardless of cost.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 19th 2024, 06:06 PM
Response to Original message |