So, yeah, pretty much only the Dutch would see it. Besides a few people trying to stir things up, leading to 200 oversensitive internet users bitching about it, this has absolutely no impact on Sony in the GLOBAL economy.
Then that is where we differ primarily then. In this day and age, for a global company to say "well, only this one country will see it" does not seem in any way logical to me. Not too mention that I think this ad agency touched on this subject on purpose, which I think is wrong, to sell video games. In addition, though they may be different in their approach, I am in no way about to believe that race issues are just a US subject.
Actually, I never said that. YOU said that. Sony has the obligation to it's shareholders to operate with high moral standards regardless of their location. Is it OK for Sony executives to take part in illegal activities as long as no one but insiders know about it? Absolutely not. So just because this ad was in one location doesn't make it acceptable. Period. And for the record, I love Sony and their products. But I think they've overstepped their bounds on this one. What you do in your country is your business. What I think in my country is mine. Capiche?
Uhh, no. Sony has an obligation to it's shareholders to operate within the law and earn a profit. And I'm not gonna discuss this anymore, because Sony IMO are complete geniouses. They've got you guys up in arms of a picture, while they're sitting back and watching the buzz for them. As long as yall are talking about it you aren't forgetting about them, and that's all Sony wants. So, congrats, you've been outsmarted.
I don't think Sony was in danger of being 'forgotten' anytime soon. And despite what the old cliches tell you, there is a such thing as good and bad publicity. Not that it matters either way. Nintendo caused a lot of noise with the name Wii. It got a lot of people talking. Doesn't stop it from still being a shitty name. In any case, I'm done too. I think my point still stands. It was a stupid, irresponsible idea for an ad campaign.
Potentially alienating a large demographic does not bode well for future profits. Sony's done nothing to me. I happily own a PSP. A black one at that.
I'm bowing out of this, we're debating in circles, and quite frankly my post count doesn't need any more padding.
Mine does. Do you guys honestly believe anyone is feeling alienated because of a Dutch ad campaign that, by the way we keep conveniently forgetting, does display both sides of the fight?
Well. If this thread is indicative of reactions across the net, Sony got exactly what they wanted: A crapload of attention.
I'm sort of in between the two sides here. Is the campaign, taken as a whole, particularly racist? Not especially. Racially charged? Yes. Was this intentional? Almost definitely. Should we reasonably expect this to offend the Dutch? No. Should other coutries have a say in what advertisements remain in view in Amsterdam? Absolutely not. Should every ad campaign be scrutinized by people in other countries just because this is the Internet age? Also no. Did Sony reasonably expect only the Dutch to see it or care about it? Well... Do consider, everyone, that Amsterdam is not only the official capital of The Netherlands, but also well-known as a major tourist destination. It is well known that American tourists especially like to visit there on vacation during spring and summer. What season is it? Oh yes, summer. Where is the billboard mostly noted as being? In Amsterdam. How do you suppose it is that we saw the billboard to begin with? This was inevitable from the very beginning. Was this a mistake on Sony's part, or do they just expect to use "this is the Netherlands, we have no race issue here" as an excuse? I don't know, but even if that was the plan, it's being blown out of proportion. At this point, I'm starting to not care. If anyone should the pissed that the Dutch have an ad like this, it should probably be South Africa, not the United States. I think my favorite part of the thread is Twin Twist getting his pants in a knot when he's not American or Dutch, and is telling people not to tell people what to think or do, which is itself telling people what to think or do. I especially like the notion that senators and the NAACP or anyone who states an opinion online is a fanboy and that fanboys are not part of the public. That's a new one on me.
Advertising is a dirty business, and adverts like this happen a lot more then you would think. And no, it's not just an issue in the US. However, it is very MINOR here, and ALMOST non-existant. Now the tensions between 'regular' Dutch and Muslims...THAT'S our 'black and white'.
well planning on no one seeing their adveritsement outside of a very small area obviously didn't work well. at this point the target audience or whatever is irrelevant. the ad has pretty much gone worldwide and sony can't blame that on someone for owning a camera, they can blame themselves for making the ad in the first place.
Hmn, well I can't let this one pass by now can I? 1. Regarding me telling people what to do, I didn't do that. I merely stated how mind-boggling it is that people are willing to get all uptight about something and preach from some ridiculous moral highground about something that, other than on the internet, would otherwise not be seen by them. But if you want to misconstrue my posts, go right ahead. 2. You claim the "public" are "sick of Sony's lies" elsewhere in the the thread. Claiming that they're tired of it. No. You're passing off "fanboy" opinion on to a portion of the gaming market that don't care about E3, who don't scour the internet to find morsels of scraps of information, who simply aren't affected by this kind of internet witch hunt. These people make up the biggest part of the market. These are the "public", the "fanboy" population can be most easily summed up like adult collectors of Transformers. A very vocal minority. Again, it's a witch hunt on the internet. I fail to see why these images were even forwarded to the Senator and the Sillicon Valley blowhards. If that's not some heavy handed agenda, I really don't know what is. I remember back in the day being able to discuss company A and B on the merits of the machines and the games on them, it seems less and less these days that that's even thought about. Shame. And save the "Well if Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo did 'blah' then this wouldn't even be an issue." because quite frankly it's tired and old and I'm not interested.
It seemed rather implied in the tone to me, but maybe that's just a difference in cultural atmosphere too. Like that last bit right there, you're doing it again. By sarcastically saying "go ahead" you're really saying "don't". Maybe, but at worst it's still a minority that is a subset of the whole. They are not "Two completely seperate entities." Don't think this stuff stays isolated, either. The hype about PS2 filtered to the masses long before the system was officially advertised. Word gets around when it seems interesting enough. I was with two friends yesterday. One of them is online a lot, but has little to no interest in console games. The other likes console games but is not computer-savvy and does not use the Internet. He also primarily owns and uses Sony consoles. The first friend, who hasn't bought a game console since the original PlayStation mentioned that it sounded like the PlayStation 3 was going to be really powerful and pretty great. As you probably expected, I was going to object--but I was interrupted. My completely offline PlayStation dominant friend was the one who got in "that's what they said about the last one". I was surprised, because I never fed him this info. He got it somewhere else. Anecdotal, I know, but when gamers hang out together, online or not, hardcore or casual, word gets around. I like how you assume that Sony-hating fanboy gamers did this. A great many American tourists visit Amsterdam. Any number of them might be upset by the advertisement in question. It is at least as likely that it was some cannabis-loving hippie. "Wow, that's not cool, man." They love contacting minority lobby groups. Minority lobbyist groups love contacting senators. It might even have been a bonafide minority member. But of course it has to have been one of "us" right? Or maybe Sony isn't the only group subject to so-called "witch hunts". I'd like to go back to just discussing the hardware and games too, but when one company or the other starts playing dirty that gets a lot harder to do and you ought to know that. You can't wave that off, exclude it from discussion, and pretend it doesn't matter, because it's the very policy of disruptive marketing that makes that impossible anymore. Funny how that's exactly what we've been talking about, isn't it?
I'm pretty sure that most "tourists" that go to Amsterdam are going to be way too high to notice these ads.
Actually you did say that and you're saying it again. You've said twice now that Sony has to work to suit what's morally acceptable in your country no matter where they are. There are several errors in your arguement. Sony have no obligation to operate to any moral standard, as long as they operate within the law they can get up to as much dickery as they please. Also this ad was in no way illegal, otherwise it wouldn't get out in the first place so I don't know what you're bringing "illegal activities" into it for. Totally ignoring that, you've just backed up what everyone was saying about cultural context. "What you do in your country is your business" indeed it is. What the Dutch do in their country is their business too so why is everyone sticking their noses in and getting them out of joint over something that's got nothing to do with them?
I see. And you've been there yourself or personally know a considerable number of people who have vacationed there? Contrary to legend, not everyone who visits Amsterdam goes there for pot. Most people who do go to Amsterdam at least partly for pot do not spend their entire trip stoned. In fact, that would be rather difficult. Even someone who WAS stoned completely off his hass has some chance of noticing a gigantic billboard and finding it offensive. I've known enough stoners and non-stoner tourists to Amsterdam to know this. I think you are correct in a few points, but there are a few errors in your argument as well. Sony, quite obviously, is a large company. What people seem to forget nowadays is that even the largest company is nothing more than a group of individual humans working together to make money. Individual humans are responsible for their actions within the company that determine what the company does. While we can't expect every human being to have the exact same moral system, we generally do expect all people to have a moral standard of some sort. If all people are obligated to behave morally by some standard or other, and a company is made up of people, then a company is also obligated to have moral standards. This does not mean that it is immoral to create or post the ad that people are getting upset about, but it does kill the argument that Sony doesn't need to have standards of some sort. Also, while 03Mach1 may have backed up what he was trying to contradict, you've contradicted what you were trying to back up. You ask him what he's doing bitching about what the Dutch are doing if what someone does in their own country is their own business. Yet according to your user info, you are bitching about this to him from Scotland, which is neither the country where the ad is posted nor the country where some people have decided to do something pointless and ineffective or at least sit and bitch about it. What you're doing by complaining about it is the same as what you're complaining about. Like so: See?
Something conspicuously absent from these ads: An actual reason for me to buy a PSP. Unless they come with the hot, angry models -- in which case, w00t! -XCN-
