New bus ad campaign draws a link between skepticism and atheism

[Riverwolf]

Well, not everyone has poor social skills.

I'll let you guys try to work it out, then.

At least they're thinking about it. Better than apathy. And maybe it would make them want to talk to someone about it, or come to a forum like this.

Not something that can be counted on, though. Not in my experience.

It's not your money; you can't dictate how they spend it. And the obviously thought it was worth it, otherwise they wouldn't have done it.

Yeah. Just like a lot of people think it's worth spending a hundred bucks in hopes of winning five at a slot machine.

You're not a very optimistic person, are you?

It's hard to be socially optimistic in America.

 

[Falvlun]

Yeah. Just like a lot of people think it's worth spending a hundred bucks in hopes of winning five at a slot machine.

No, more like spending money on an ad that may or may not get people to buy your product.

It's hard to be socially optimistic in America.

So we should just curl up and do nothing? Why not just give it a go?

 

[Riverwolf]

No, more like spending money on an ad that may or may not get people to buy your product.

You don't have to be a business major to know that trying to sell a product on a "who knows" basis is a very dumb move. Such a company will most likely go under very quickly.

In order for an advertisement to work, it has to cater to what it's target audience will listen to. For example, I frequently see a commercial for some kind of cellphone that uses battles, car chases, and the like to cater to a market that currently loves that kind of thing. That's a very smart commercial that will definitely rope in a good amount of customers.

Now, imagine what would happen if that company tried to market that phone with brilliantly written dialogue scenes rather than action scenes.

So we should just curl up and do nothing? Why not just give it a go?

You can try if you want. Just go out, gather a bunch of strangers and start talking about deep things with them.

I'll do my part in social change through my work on games that recapture the philosophical depth of Ultimas 4 and 5.

 

[dogsgod]

I love this ad campaign, it gets people thinking. Questioning religion along with other extraordinary claims is long overdue.

 

[Falvlun]

You don't have to be a business major to know that trying to sell a product on a "who knows" basis is a very dumb move. Such a company will most likely go under very quickly.

In order for an advertisement to work, it has to cater to what it's target audience will listen to. For example, I frequently see a commercial for some kind of cellphone that uses battles, car chases, and the like to cater to a market that currently loves that kind of thing. That's a very smart commercial that will definitely rope in a good amount of customers.

Now, imagine what would happen if that company tried to market that phone with brilliantly written dialogue scenes rather than action scenes.

And how do you know that this market strategy won't reach it's target audience?

Besides, the main point is just to get the message out there. It does that, just by existing.

You can try if you want. Just go out, gather a bunch of strangers and start talking about deep things with them.

I'll do my part in social change through my work on games that recapture the philosophical depth of Ultimas 4 and 5.

The billboard could provide an opening for such a conversation.

And if you are working on social change, then that means you don't think it as hopeless of a problem as you made it out to be.

 

[dogsgod]

I'm personally against marketing beliefs of any kind as if they were products. It's almost insulting.

Christ is not a product? Do you have any idea how much money the church brings in selling Christ? Do you know of a more successful product in the world than Christ?

 

[Father Heathen]

Christ is not a product?

More like a corporate mascot.

 

[Riverwolf]

And how do you know that this market strategy won't reach it's target audience?

That kind of thinking is dangerous in business.

Besides, the main point is just to get the message out there. It does that, just by existing.

But its existence will be based on its success. If it's not successful, it will go away before making any real impact.

The billboard could provide an opening for such a conversation.

And if you are working on social change, then that means you don't think it as hopeless of a problem as you made it out to be.

I don't think social change is impossible or hopeless. I just don't think advertisements are the best way to do it. (though they're certainly better than street preachers) At best, I'd estimate that it'd get about 2% of the people who see it talking, and they'd be people already interested. Everyone else will just ignore it.

From what I've seen of history, stories have been the most surefire way to promote social change. And so I'll use that.

For example, during the Cold War, and even to an extent today, there were literally hundreds of books and movies showcasing the horrors of a post nuclear war world. I'd wager that if those stories weren't around, a nuclear war would have happened.

 

[waitasec]

I'm personally against marketing beliefs of any kind as if they were products. It's almost insulting.

i sort of see what you are saying...
but i also see this as an attempt at flipping the finger at the status quo...
and putting people in a position to think about something they take for granted.

 

[Riverwolf]

Christ is not a product? Do you have any idea how much money the church brings in selling Christ? Do you know of a more successful product in the world than Christ?

Oh, please. That statement would only have merit if it always cost money in order to believe in Christ.

As it stands, nobody can sell religious figures, so Christ is not a product. The Bible is a product, but most translations are available for free online. Churches make money mostly through donations, from what I understand.

So, no, Christ is not a product.

 

[dogsgod]

Oh, please. That statement would only have merit if it always cost money in order to believe in Christ.

As it stands, nobody can sell religious figures, so Christ is not a product. The Bible is a product, but most translations are available for free online. Churches make money mostly through donations, from what I understand.

So, no, Christ is not a product.

And what planet are you from?

 

[waitasec]

Oh, please. That statement would only have merit if it always cost money in order to believe in Christ.

As it stands, nobody can sell religious figures, so Christ is not a product. The Bible is a product, but most translations are available for free online. Churches make money mostly through donations, from what I understand.

So, no, Christ is not a product.

crosses
paintings
the tithe...
yes people literally buy into the idea of christ....indeed

 

[Falvlun]

That kind of thinking is dangerous in business.

I asked how you knew that this wouldn't reach it's target audience.

And the business analogy can only go so far. There is no monetary return even if this thing is successful.

But its existence will be based on its success. If it's not successful, it will go away before making any real impact.

These things only seem to be getting more popular. It's just about raising awareness, and I think it's doing that.

And really, why do you care whether it's successful or not? The point still stands that it's this group's money to spend whatever way they see fit.

I don't think social change is impossible or hopeless. I just don't think advertisements are the best way to do it. (though they're certainly better than street preachers) At best, I'd estimate that it'd get about 2% of the people who see it talking, and they'd be people already interested. Everyone else will just ignore it.

You don't know that. And nothing's really lost by trying.

Advertisements are probably not the best long-term strategy, but they have a good track record of getting people's attention, and that's what they're going for at this point.

From what I've seen of history, stories have been the most surefire way to promote social change. And so I'll use that.

For example, during the Cold War, and even to an extent today, there were literally hundreds of books and movies showcasing the horrors of a post nuclear war world. I'd wager that if those stories weren't around, a nuclear war would have happened.

So, we should be making movies about atheist heros? That might be a bit awkward.

There are the "His Dark Materials" books, with an overt atheistic message, but they weren't all that popular as far as I can tell.

I'm fine with multiple methods, though. I don't think it's just going to be one thing that works.

 

[Alceste]

I hate ads. I'd much rather see graffiti.

 

[Apex]

CFI's new campaign, which is set to roll out on Toronto transit buses soon, has ads that read:



You can read more about the campaign here: New bus ads to take on Bigfoot, Christ - thestar.com

What do you think about this?

Seems to fit right in with their general M.O.
My general feelings towards them and their campaign is best summed up by an atheist here. I thought his description of CFI was pretty hilarious, and accurate judging from what I have seen from them.

It seems to me that the ads suggest a link between skepticism and atheism. Is this valid?

No. And the atheist community constantly repeating this mantra will not make it true either.

Do you think that lumping Christ and Allah in with these other items is fair? Is religion an "extraordinary claim"?

From their point of view, sure.

 

[Penumbra]

You mentioned them.

Nope, I didn't mention politics or extremists in this thread. I mentioned actions. I'm talking about the whole deal here.

Because there are loud and dogmatic adherents to Hinduism, too. (And seeing as you follow a variant of Hindu philosophy, you should know how crazy that is.) And there are loud, dogmatic adherents to peace-loving movements, as well.

Hinduism is an extremely diverse set of beliefs. Much of the loud and dogmatic ones have loud and dogmatic beliefs to go along with their actions.

Sames goes for Abrahamic religions. Except not every religion is the same. Some are inherently more dogmatic than others. For some of them, you've got to believe a given book is word-for-word from god to even be labeled a member of that religion. In another, a given creed covers like 90% of denominations or so.

Allah and Christ are characters. In different beliefs, their characters differ wildly. But if we're going to nitpick about every exception and every fringe, then we might as well not even use words, because the whole point of words to is provide a common understanding. Allah and Christ mean certain specific things to huge masses of people on this planet, and they were included in the campaign. And those specific things often include anger, judgment, wrath, caring what people do naked, caring what people do on certain days, caring what people say, etc.

The entire point of me mentioning that was to show that it fits well within the group selected. I purposely used a blunt way of describing an aspect of what millions (or billions) of people believe, even if it doesn't cover every Jew, Christian, or Muslim.

How a system is used by some isn't necessarily a good standard for judging it.

The system can be judged by what it is and still be found wanting. You can go to the source and read the holy books or ask groups of adherents of that religion what they believe.

Honestly, I was focusing on the angry part, not so much the naked part. Most people in general, religious or not, seem to care about what people do when naked. (facepalm not at you, BTW, but at such people)

]Didn't say it wasn't. I focused on what you described.

I didn't say it wasn't. Like I said: I agree with the aphorism.

But that's the whole point. I don't see why you are adding unnecessary tangents to your own thread.

The point is that gods fit very well within that group of unproven phenomena. I used loud and dogmatic (and extremely common) ones as an example to illustrate my point, but it applies to most gods.

 

[ellenjanuary]

CFI's new campaign, which is set to roll out on Toronto transit buses soon, has ads that read:



You can read more about the campaign here: New bus ads to take on Bigfoot, Christ - thestar.com

What do you think about this?

It seems to me that the ads suggest a link between skepticism and atheism. Is this valid?

Do you think that lumping Christ and Allah in with these other items is fair? Is religion an "extraordinary claim"?

Having experience with advertising and marketing, I'd have to say that this is anti-Islam.

 

[dogsgod]

Having experience with advertising and marketing, I'd have to say that this is anti-Islam.

But Allah is listed first, before the others, making it pro-Islam.

 

[ellenjanuary]

But Allah is listed first, before the others, making it pro-Islam.

Which should have made Zeus last. Since Zeus is not last, I smell agenda; another thing I have some experience with.

 

[Magic Man]

Seems to fit right in with their general M.O.
My general feelings towards them and their campaign is best summed up by an atheist here. I thought his description of CFI was pretty hilarious, and accurate judging from what I have seen from them.

Haha. Why am I not surprised you agree with that drivel? I don't care if one likes or dislikes this organization because, frankly I know almost nothing about them. But at least give good reasons for not liking them. That article was just a bunch of nonsense.

No. And the atheist community constantly repeating this mantra will not make it true either.

You're right. That won't make it true. The fact that it's true makes it true. But I'm sure you can back up your assertion that it's not true with some kind of reasoning, right?