Do you think the ad should be banned and what parts of the Code have you based your decision on? by https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k AMB220 Week 6 Ethics en-us 2019-08-09 01:24:07 UTC 2022-09-13 01:15:59 UTC hello@padlet.com https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/376511294 I think the ad should be banned based on prevailing community standards. Due to the portrayal of aggressive and violent behaviour of the mother (section 2.3)]]> 2019-08-22 23:04:14 UTC https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/376511294 https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/376526476 Banned. In Section 2.3 it says that suggestion of menace is unacceptable. This advert depicted the mother in a menacing way.]]> 2019-08-23 00:54:32 UTC https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/376526476 https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/376561420 Should be banned as the Code states in section 2.3 that ads "shall not
present or portray violence unless it is justifiable in the
context of the product or service advertised." Poor insurance choices do not constitute an overly violent and aggressive outburst, especially as the setting was a child's party.]]> 2019-08-23 05:36:41 UTC https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/376561420 https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/376568412 Should be banned due to the very violent and aggressive behaviour of the mother. It isn't justifiable.. especially not for a health coverage company. (Section 2.3)]]> 2019-08-23 06:41:47 UTC https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/376568412 https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/376828471 The code 2.3  applies, Advertising or Marketing Communications shall not present or portray violence unless it is justifiable in the context of the product or service advertised. Although, I personally think that the ad is acceptable because she is using the pinata the way that is intended and no one was harmed.]]> 2019-08-24 13:29:00 UTC https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/376828471 https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/376965393 I believe the ad should be banned as the code 2.3 applies. This code states that violence should not be present or portrayed unless it is justifiable in the context of the produce or service advertisement. Due to the violent behaviour of the mother, it isn't justifiable for a health coverage company. ]]> 2019-08-26 02:28:55 UTC https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/376965393 https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/395969280 2019-10-10 05:34:51 UTC https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/395969280 https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/481161925 I believe the ad should be banned. Stated in section 2.3, 'a strong suggestion of menace presents violence in an unacceptable manner'. This is evident in the ad as her reaction over health insurance isn't justifiable. Furthermore, the setting at a children's party also means that children will be in the broader audience, and could replicate this behaviour. This could breach section 2.6 (health and safety) as it depicts unsafe behaviour that children have the potential to imitate. ]]> 2020-03-30 01:54:43 UTC https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/481161925 I believe the ad must be banned because it portrayed inappropriate violence when it was unnecessary to the product. This is especially reinforced by the fact that the mother was violent in a children's setting. According to Section 2.3 of AANA Code of Ethics, "a strong suggestion of menace presents violence in an unacceptable manner and breaches this section of the Code". https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/1706040477 2021-08-31 03:09:17 UTC https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/1706040477 It must be banned. Based on AANA Ethics code, Advertising or Marketing Communications shall not present or portray violence (Section 2.3) but in this advertisement, the mother's actions are unacceptable. Moreover, in section 2.6, Advertising shall not depict material contrary to Prevailing Community Standards on health and safety but the action in this ad is infringing on the safety and health of children. https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/1707418352 2021-08-31 15:35:51 UTC https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/1707418352 Not Ban https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/1712036219 Although section 2.3. prohibits the portrayal of violence in advertising, in this circumstance I don't think violence is being presented. The mother is hitting a piñata; a culturally mainstream practice which audiences would reasonably associate the advertisement with. As audiences can relatively identify that the mother is just hitting the piñata, following tradition, the act cannot be classified as violence. Therefore, I would not ban this ad. ]]> 2021-09-02 05:56:32 UTC https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/1712036219 I do not think the ad should be banned. Although the code states in section 2.3 that ads shouldn't "present or portray violence unless it is justifiable in thecontext of the product or service advertised", the violence portrayed is comedic, non-threatening and is onto a human or animal. The hitting of a pinata is a culturally acceptable party activity in Australia, and comedically hitting an inanimate object that is already known to be hit as part of a game does not promote or encourage violence. https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/2167814753 2022-05-03 05:27:29 UTC https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/2167814753 I do not believe that this advertisement should be banned. Although Code 2.3 states that advertisements should not present or depict violence - it is clear that the mother is hitting a pinata which must be done to break a piñata and is not out of context or unobvious. https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/2169395987 2022-05-04 04:59:11 UTC https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/2169395987 https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/2169420885 In this case, the advertisement should not be banned. According to Code 2.3, advertisements "shall not present or portray violence unless it is justifiable in the context of the product or service advertised." The violence depicted in this advertisement is justified. In Australia and many other parts of the world, hitting the pinata is a common cultural practise at children's parties. Furthermore, the violence in this advertisement is directed at an inanimate object designed to be hit, rather than (unacceptably) hitting a person or an animal. It could also be argued that the mother's level of aggression is necessary in context, as the act of hitting the pinata is intended to convey her frustration with rising insurance prices.]]> 2022-05-04 05:33:33 UTC https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/2169420885 Response to advertisement https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/2172264872 In regards to the advertisement, it should not be banned. According to section 2.3 from the  AANA's Code of Ethics, despite the advertisement displaying anger of the mother hitting the piñata, as a piñata is an inanimate object which is intended to be hit as depicted in the advertisement, this is not a display of menace of violence. Additionally, by the mother hitting the piñata, it has relevance towards the content of the product being advertised, which is supported by section 2.3. Further, within the ad, despite the inclusion of minors (at a birthday party), the minors enjoyed the piñata being broken as they were able to have chocolate, which does not display any harm inflicted towards minors or other parties. Therefore, the advertisement is permitted and should not be banned. ]]> 2022-05-06 01:26:30 UTC https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/2172264872 https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/2172514789 According to Code 2.3, I think the advertisement should be banned as "realistic depictions of the consequences of violence are not acceptable." It was not necessary and not relevant to the product regarding the mother's action. In addition, this will leads to Code 2.6 which is "Advertisers should take care not to depict behaviour that children may imitate." Due to the mother's action, it was not acceptable and and isn't justifiable for a health coverage company.]]> 2022-05-06 07:17:35 UTC https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/2172514789 https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/2293346390 I think the ad should be band as section 2.3 in the AANA Code of Ethics states, "Advertising or Marketing Communications shall not present or portray violence unless it is justifiable in the context of the product or service advertised." The product of insurance does not justify the use of 'violence' and is unnecessary in regard to the product being advertised. ]]> 2022-09-13 01:15:59 UTC https://padlet.com/user_985841d955054b01ae678476b693b259_69839_1/70il07z8m42k/wish/2293346390