RootsChat.Com
General => The Common Room => The Lighter Side => Topic started by: IgorStrav on Thursday 13 November 14 19:10 GMT (UK)
-
Just to ask everyone's opinion
This ad is well worth watching for the beautiful filming and their efforts to achieve accuracy for the historical scene they're setting. And for the fact that it refers to a very important historical anniversary.
But do you think it's appropriate to attach a Supermarket's name to this - presumably to encourage people to shop there this Christmas?
I am worried by this (and I work in Retail) - what does everyone think?
-
I found it respectful, poignant and as you say beautifully filmed.
I was left feeling I was going to try and appreciate every minute of Christmas with my family this year, as you never know what is to come.
It honestly did not occur to me to question the association with a supermarket until I read your post. I think I would have had a problem with it if it had had Sainsbury's name prominently displayed all through, and a more obvious promotion of the company.
Some background
http://www.britishlegion.org.uk/about-us/news/remembrance/sainsburys-and-the-legion-partner-to-bring-ww1-christmas-truce-story-to-life
-
Very poignant and not in your face, only very subtle advertising, and Sainsbury's is raising funds for the Royal British Legion:
"Sainsbury's is celebrating 20 years of supporting The Royal British Legion by doing more than ever to raise funds during this year's Poppy Appeal.
The retailer hopes to surpass last year's fundraising total of £4.5 million by increasing its support across merchandise, in-store donation, and for the first time ever, a TV advert with striking animations to drive donations and raise awareness of the national cause."
-
ooooh - not sure......... :-\
xin
-
Thank you for your replies.
I remain worried by the advertisement. Whilst I know that Sainsbury's are supporting a very good cause, I know that the marketing spend on this beautiful production will also have the intention of increasing sales over the coming period.
But it is always good to be reminded that wars are fought by young men (and women) on both sides who often have as much in common as what divides them.
-
Does any one have any thoughts on Sainsbury's Christmas advert based on the above???
Bad Taste!!?
Andrew
Moderator comment: topics merged
-
Surely it's not as bad as the countless Christmas adverts which have already started for toys, food, etc. :)
-
I haven't seen the ad on TV, but just watched on youtube. Not sure what to make of it - the Christmas truce and Silent Night are always tearjerkers, but as a supermarket ad? I don't think I do approve, and will we be seeing it ad nauseam for the next 6 weeks?
-
Bad taste as far as I'm concerned. No matter how beautifully shot and the sentiments expressed. Using the brief respite these young men of both sides had from the horrors of the trenches for commercial gain stinks. So they say they will donate to charity, well I think a lot more will be going in their coffers. Using this event in this way trivializes a well known moment of hope amid the carnage of WWI. What will they do for Easter, stage a crucifixion.
Well, you asked and this is of course only my opinion, others may differ.
-
If the British Legion were happy to collaborate, then who are we to object. Apart from bearing Sainsbury's name, there is little in the way of advertising.
If you want to be critical, then how about Tesco refusing to allow a Legion veteran to stand in their foyer to sell his poppies, they only changed their stance after receiving bad publicity.
-
Moi, critical, I was merely expressing a personal opinion. I wish Sainsbury's all the best in finding cynical methods to offset their 290 million pounds loss.
-
I felt emotionally manipulated. And why? To make me go to Sainsbury's.
Harlemswife
-
Bad taste as far as I'm concerned. No matter how beautifully shot and the sentiments expressed. Using the brief respite these young men of both sides had from the horrors of the trenches for commercial gain stinks.
That's pretty much my opinion too. I've already seen FB posts urging people down to Sainsbury's and it just doesn't sit well with me, but if the British Legion ran the same film and simply asked for donations the sad truth is that people on the whole just wouldn't respond.
Unfortunately its nothing new (think loo rolls & guide dogs for example), except that the marketing industry has suddenly woken up to the huge potential of branding a product alongside a 'cause' and are now pulling out all of the stops to tug at our heartstrings whilst tapping into the consumerist society we now live in.
"86% of consumers are more likely to buy a product that is associated with a cause or issue and 73% of consumers agree that they would switch brands for the same reason"
"You can ‘emotionalise’ your brand and create a new buying experience for your customers while helping us raise awareness"
Source: Breakthrough Breast Cancer: http://www.breakthrough.org.uk/support-us/partner-your-business-us
For this reason I wont be buying a chocolate bar from Sainsbury's, nor do I 'buy pink', although I do donate, sponsor etc.
-
I don't have a problem with it. I thought it very well produced and the fact that the Legion seems very happy with their long standing relationship with Sainsbury's says a lot. This sort of thing is part of life nowadays but this particular example is better done than most. I particularly like the idea of the chocolate being made in Ieper.
Imber
-
My personal opinion?
It's far better than the commercialisation of Christmas by Coca-Cola?! :-X
-
I'm heartily sick already of the Christmas TV ads showing by the supermarkets. No wonder their profits are down, if they throw money at these kitschy ads, which must cost millions to make. They don't change my shopping habits in the slightest.
And by the way can I squash once and for all the myth that Coca Cola was responsible for introducing Father Christmas in red robes rather than green or any other colour - I have German illustrated books far older than Coca Cola which show him in red robes!
-
I actually found the advert very good and is certainly up there with Monty The Penguin as the best advert this Christmas. The Royal British Legion must have been happy with it as they are in partnership with them and they even tweeted about the advert.
But we do have to remember it is the centenary of when the Christmas Truce happened which did create joy for the soldiers and extinguish some of the fear of being killed. But it also brings out one of the true meanings of Christmas that Christmas is for sharing with other people and being happy.
So in my opinion, it is a great Christmas advert and is one of two that stand out so far this year. The chocolate bar looks very realistic for the time - I might have to go and get one seeming that the profits for it go to the legion as well.
-
I agree with you about the advert Clarkey. It is extremely well made and so poignant.
Rather than entreating one and all to come to the store to overspend on non-essentials it should make people think, and be thankful for their lives today.
You are correct in that the profit from every chocolate bar sold goes to the British Legion so if I were passing I might pop in to buy one.
Thinking in terms of 'ad nauseum' as mentioned by Top-of-the Hill, or being emotionally manipulated (Harlem) seems a little uncaring. My opinion only though so don't jump on me!
Jebber, I think it was a branch of Morrisons, not Tesco, and that was down to one individual, not company policy.
-
I stand corrected mrs, apologies to Tesco. Whether it was branch or company policy, it was publicity that changed the situation. Over thirty years ago I resigned from a job because the branch manager of the firm refused to allow the sale of poppies, so I don't take theses things lightly
-
I agree with Clarkey.
-
I stand corrected mrs, apologies to Tesco. Whether it was branch or company policy, it was publicity that changed the situation. Over thirty years ago I resigned from a job because the branch manager of the firm refused to allow the sale of poppies, so I don't take theses things lightly
It had been arranged by the British Legion that they would collect outside the front entrance - Like most supermarkets these days they use every available square metre to display stuff - Would they have had to move things to accommodate an indoor seller or was the foyer suitable etc - We do not know - only "89 year old veteran FORCED to stand outside, because there wasn't room in the foyer" ASDA turned the sellers away from one of their stores because they were not on the rota of charities. So they did not have the chance indoor or outdoor to collect.
Why do ex-service people have to rely on charity, Why doesn't the government provide?
-
I don't often quote from the Mail but:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2834465/Watchdog-primed-investigate-Sainsbury-s-Christmas-advert-complaints-flood-use-WWI-imagery-promote-company.html
Paul McCartney's not happy either.
Gadget
-
Not surprising if the Pipes of Peace video is similar - if it is depicting the same event.
Is it more wrong for Sainsbury's to show the Christmas Truce in an avertisement for a product being sold in aid of war veterans than it was for Paul McCartney to have shown it in a video promoting his own record?
-
Well, I don't know about Paul McCartney, but I think it's some of his fans who are jumping on the anti bandwagon. What for I don't know as the 'original' was most definitely out for making pots of money, and not for the benefit of those who have served the country.
As for the complaints to ASA, words are failing me.
I see you have made the same point Galium, with reference to the P McC version.
Christmas 1914 by Mike Harding depicted the same event, and that makes me cry every time.
-
There was also the final scene in Black Adder.
Every time I see versions of the Christmas truce, I recall my Grandad's words from his WW1 diary ~
'The worst Christmas I've ever had'
Gadget
-
I can't begin to imagine how they must have felt, having a moment of (almost) normality then commencing to take up arms again in order to kill each other.
-
Just to ask everyone's opinion
This ad is well worth watching for the beautiful filming and their efforts to achieve accuracy for the historical scene they're setting. And for the fact that it refers to a very important historical anniversary.
But do you think it's appropriate to attach a Supermarket's name to this - presumably to encourage people to shop there this Christmas?
I am worried by this (and I work in Retail) - what does everyone think?
I disagree that it is "accurate", It is far from it.
WW1 Army Officers wrote about how shocked they were at the malnourished and unhealthy condition of the soldiers who joined up. The advert is overly sentimental and glosses over the very real poverty of the working class (who were the vast majority of the population) and also the horrors of the war. Downton Abbey I think does this glossy sanitised version of history as well
It is bad taste and I don't think it should have been done . It seems to me like exploitation and done for profits
-
I disagree that it is "accurate", It is far from it.
WW1 Army Officers wrote about how shocked they were at the malnourished and unhealthy condition of the soldiers who joined up. The advert is overly sentimental and glosses over the very real poverty of the working class (who were the vast majority of the population) and also the horrors of the war. Downton Abbey I think does this glossy sanitised version of history as well
It is bad taste and I don't think it should have been done . It seems to me like exploitation and done for profits
I'm not altogether sure of the accuracy of that statement. Surely it could not possibly cover every officer and volunteer. Perhaps some officers wrote that some volunteers appeared to be malnourished, which is quite possibly the case.
I'm still of the opinion that there is nothing to complain about, not like some of the crass adverts currently on TV encouraging overindulgence, overspending, and worse yet, taking out loans which are going to be difficult to repay.
-
I disagree that it is "accurate", It is far from it.
WW1 Army Officers wrote about how shocked they were at the malnourished and unhealthy condition of the soldiers who joined up. The advert is overly sentimental and glosses over the very real poverty of the working class (who were the vast majority of the population) and also the horrors of the war. Downton Abbey I think does this glossy sanitised version of history as well
It is bad taste and I don't think it should have been done . It seems to me like exploitation and done for profits
I'm not altogether sure of the accuracy of that statement. Surely it could not possibly cover every officer and volunteer. Perhaps some officers wrote that some volunteers appeared to be malnourished, which is quite possibly the case.
I'm still of the opinion that there is nothing to complain about, not like some of the crass adverts currently on TV encouraging overindulgence, overspending, and worse yet, taking out loans which are going to be difficult to repay.
Thankyou for correcting my typo , not sure if i should have added a ' to "Officers" or not
According to this book it was probably more than just "some" and more like the majority. Before WW1 the army had to change its enlistment qualifications. Have read about it other books too
http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1333
In chapter two, Duffett provides the background story of British army food provisioning during the 19th century, depicting it as pitifully inadequate. The army was, in fact, the employer of next-to-last resort, slightly preferable to the workhouse. The men who did enlist in this low status job were already malnourished and physically underdeveloped; the army conceded this when it lowered the height requirement, first by three inches (to 5 ft. 3 in.) and later by another two inches, in order to let enough men into the ranks. Army rations did little to improve the health of rankers.
The Stomach for Fighting: Food and the Soldiers of the Great War
Rachel Duffett
Manchester University Press
Its mentioned a few times in this book
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Forgotten-Voices-Great-War-History/dp/0091888875
Yet the clean and fresh Tommy in the advert looks like he has always been eating a Sunday dinner three times a day :-\
-
I’m surprised by comments that the advert is not accurate. Is it supposed to be an accurate representation? It is, after all, only a TV commercial - which are not known for their accuracy,
I was interested in statements in an article in the Financial Times: “While the advertisement, in partnership with the Royal British Legion, has been viewed 4.5m times on YouTube, the Advertising Standards Authority has received 137 complaints about it.” AND
“Four years ago, a John Lewis Christmas ad featuring a dog outside in a kennel in snowy weather received 316 complaints. The ASA decided not to investigate.” www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e20acad0-6c20-11e4-b939-00144feabdc0.html
-
Good evening,
I had not seen the ad until tonight, and then only because I clicked on the link given. I have watched the ad and the 2 videos about it's making before deciding on whether it is OK.
I appreciate that every one is entitled to their own point of view but lets look at it logically.
There is no mention of Sainsbury's until the end followed by the Legion title.
There is no mention of encouraging people to rush down to Sainsbury's to do all their Christmas shopping. The only thing shown is a bar of chocolate which they would like you to buy and all proceeds from that go to the RBL, not into Sainsbury's coffers. It then says that Christmas is a time for sharing, which it is, some share more than others but that is a personal thing.
In Dec 1914 only the regular army and the Territorials were in France. They were all well fed and even after 5 months on the front line, although maybe a little hungry, were not malnourished. The talk of people joining up who were malnourished was started after conscription, 1916, when we had to start taking on more and more young men. Some not so young, my Great uncle was 36 and was dead a year later.
I can find nothing wrong with the ad and see no reason for it to be stopped.
John915
-
Well said John15 re the condition of the soldiers at that time. You just beat me to it.
Imber
-
Good evening,
I had not seen the ad until tonight, and then only because I clicked on the link given. I have watched the ad and the 2 videos about it's making before deciding on whether it is OK.
I appreciate that every one is entitled to their own point of view but lets look at it logically.
There is no mention of Sainsbury's until the end followed by the Legion title.
There is no mention of encouraging people to rush down to Sainsbury's to do all their Christmas shopping. The only thing shown is a bar of chocolate which they would like you to buy and all proceeds from that go to the RBL, not into Sainsbury's coffers. It then says that Christmas is a time for sharing, which it is, some share more than others but that is a personal thing.
In Dec 1914 only the regular army and the Territorials were in France. They were all well fed and even after 5 months on the front line, although maybe a little hungry, were not malnourished. The talk of people joining up who were malnourished was started after conscription, 1916, when we had to start taking on more and more young men. Some not so young, my Great uncle was 36 and was dead a year later.
I can find nothing wrong with the ad and see no reason for it to be stopped.
John915
The point I was trying to make is that people were already malnourished before the war had even started. Some men, and boys for that matter, joined the army because they would get meals, clothes and boots. It was already seen as an alternative to unemployment / low wages or the workhouse.
The first audio clip in this link is of an ex WW1 soldier , looking back at the times and how he felt about conditions before and during the war
1. An ex-Bradford Pals soldier (Second Battalion) recalls enlisting for a pound a week - play clip (1:33)
http://www.bradlibs.com/bradfordpals/web_audio/audio1.htm
-
I don't find the ad disrespectful.
Yes, it's beautifully shot and poignant. Yes, it's not historically accurate. And if the Royal British Legion raise money from it that's brilliant. As for similarities to Paul McCartney's video from the 80s, well they would be similar - they both depict the same event.
I don't see it as a cynical marketing ploy by Sainsbury's - no Sainsbury's produce or prices are shown (apart from the fund raising chocolate). Watching it doesn't make me think I've got to rush to Sainsbury's. But maybe I'm naive :-\
However watching it with my 14 year old daughter it did spark a conversation about the First World War, the conditions in the trenches and how young the soldiers were.
There are many ads on TV which I think are very exploitative and money grabbing-ly cynical - all adverts for online gambling, loan companies, "have you been in an accident that wasn't your fault" claim companies etc etc.
Looby :)
-
Thanks for all the interesting replies.
The bottom line of advertising, whether TV or any other media, is to build a brand and encourage more customers to buy it. In the UK we are fortunate to have very clever and entertaining advertisements amongst the overall portfolio, and the advertising industry has given some great fllm directors their initial opportunities. I love to watch advertisements, and I think the John Lewis one this Christmas is masterly.
But marketing spend is always focused on building the brand. So whether Sainsbury's had the intention of getting people into their supermarkets more this season, to give to the British Legion and/or shop, or whether they wanted us to think better of them because they've supported this charity and made a good film which reminds us of an event which is well worth remembering for many many reasons, they wanted to build their Sainsbury's brand.
My point is not whether the resulting ad is better taste than many advertisements, or whether it represents a great charity and supports it, or any of these things. I'm just uncomfortable with Sainsbury's building their brand - because this is what they are doing, subtly or not - alongside the current focus on WW1 on its hundredth anniversary.
But you are all very welcome to disagree ;D That's only my opinion.
-
Sainsbury's have certainly attained a high profile from this,without even mentioning themselves in it. The amount of debate, such has here as seen to that. Do I think that may have been an underlying intention, well, you could call me cynical but I'm sure that someone would have mapped a likely scenario of response to the ad. You cannot really fault the ad, but!
-
I will be buying Chocolate this Christmas so I will go to Sainsburys and purchase chocolate which will benefit the British legion - chocolate is a treat for me at holiday times -and I won't feel so bad eating it knowing it will pile on the pounds -but will help the British Legion (who I have supported for many years) also pile on monetary pounds
So yes the advert will get me into Sainsburys (I usually shop elsewhere) but will benefit the British legion
Suz
-
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2014-11-14/sainsburys-selling-5-000-british-legion-chocolate-bars-per-hour/
-
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2014-11-14/sainsburys-selling-5-000-british-legion-chocolate-bars-per-hour/
And at least some of that will be new customers, many of whom will buy other things whilst they're there.
Building their brand
-
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2014-11-14/sainsburys-selling-5-000-british-legion-chocolate-bars-per-hour/
And at least some of that will be new customers, many of whom will buy other things whilst they're there.
Building their brand
So that's £2,500 per hour going to the Royal British Legion!
As far as I can see - that's a good thing!! ;D
-
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2014-11-14/sainsburys-selling-5-000-british-legion-chocolate-bars-per-hour/
And at least some of that will be new customers, many of whom will buy other things whilst they're there.
Building their brand
I suppose you are right Igor. Sainsbury's will be building their brand as that's the purpose of advertising. And there will be a donation for Royal British Legion.
I still don't have a problem with the ad. I would have had a problem if the soldiers had been all singing and dancing brandishing Sainsbury's merchandise and entreating us to shop at Sainsbury.
As has already been said Paul McCartney used the same scenario back in the 80s with his Pipes of Peace song and he would have made money from that. Same with Jona Lewie with Stop the Cavalry. Blackadder goes Forth would have made money too for its writers and actors.
This is just my opinion of course.
Funnily enough I contributed to a previous thread earlier this year where someone was pondering if Dad's Army was disrespectful to the memory of those who served in the Home Guard. Some contributors said it was and their late fathers/grandfathers who had served in WW2 hadn't watched it for that reason. Others said there was nothing wrong with finding humour with that situation. I commented that I had felt even in the 80s uncomfortable watchin 'Allo 'Allo - with mixture of SS, Gestapo, French Resistance and British pilots- it had never seemed an appropriate subject for a comedy to me. But others chipped in saying that laughing and finding humour with past events was acceptable and I believe one person said it "was what we British did".
So I suppose it's all a matter of personal opinion. ;D
Looby
-
Look at the increase in sales of poppy brooches from various establishments. They have become very popular and I think some people are collecting the various styles.
Most suppliers say that all or a percentage of profit goes to BL but there are warnings about ebay sales which don't have that assurance,
I bought a birthday card last week promoting 'Help the Heroes' - 7p of my £2 will go to the charity. They will have to sell a lot of cards methinks.
-
In case anyone has not seen this, here is a link to a 'short' about the making of the said 'ad':
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2s1YvnfcFVs&feature=youtu.be
-
Better than that John Cleese with megaphone series from a few years back, which almost wrecked the company!! But then it could hardly be worse!! More like this I think.
-
The reviewer for KSL (Salt Lake City) Television on whose website the Sainsbury promotion is belatedly showing has the following comments. Can't think of anything more I can add.
"While it is advertising and its main purpose is to get us to spend our money on stuff we likely don't need, this commercial does have a beautiful message that all of us will benefit from hearing."
~~~~~~~~
-
Saw this headline in Today’s Mail Online:
“Sainsbury's branded 'hypocritical' over plans to demolish war memorial to build superstore while using WWI football truce story for Christmas advert “
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01e7u/
-
Saw this headline in Today’s Mail Online:
“Sainsbury's branded 'hypocritical' over plans to demolish war memorial to build superstore while using WWI football truce story for Christmas advert “
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01e7u/
Not sure its hypocritical if they have considered the importance of keeping a memorial in the redevelopment, but what is the alternative? If the club want to sell then is there any buyers who want to keep the ground in use rather than redevelop it? If the club move anyway would the ground then become unused eventually fall into ruin over the years. Then again maybe the publicity will bring forward an alternative that can keep the ground as is?
-
I will be buying Chocolate this Christmas so I will go to Sainsburys and purchase chocolate which will benefit the British legion - chocolate is a treat for me at holiday times -and I won't feel so bad eating it knowing it will pile on the pounds -but will help the British Legion (who I have supported for many years) also pile on monetary pounds
So yes the advert will get me into Sainsburys (I usually shop elsewhere) but will benefit the British legion
Suz
If people buying that chocolate in preference to other brands, that will raise more money, but if they buy chocolate instead of donating the money it won't. Though I assume British Legion donations from collections fall off in December, so its good its aimed at Christmas rather than Remembrance Sunday.
On the advert, I hadn't seen it, though have now via the links on this thread. All advertising/marketing is done with the idea of brand awareness, and this ad is IMO well done. Having watched it online I didn't realise they were promoting the chocolate bar, it doesn't say so in the ad and its only posts here that informed me of that fact. So if its the same on TV then well done Sainsburys, they've gone for a good advert rather than promoting the item.
Companies and charities have often been linked together (someone mentioned Guide dogs and toilet rolls) as its seen good for both, the company gets increased brand awareness from linking to the cause, and the charity get financial injection of funds.
Its not only companies who do this - what about minor celebrities giving time to promote a cause in return for good publicity exposure to relight their career?
-
Saw this headline in Today’s Mail Online:
“Sainsbury's branded 'hypocritical' over plans to demolish war memorial to build superstore while using WWI football truce story for Christmas advert “
http://www.rootschat.com/links/01e7u/
Not sure its hypocritical if they have considered the importance of keeping a memorial in the redevelopment, but what is the alternative? If the club want to sell then is there any buyers who want to keep the ground in use rather than redevelop it? If the club move anyway would the ground then become unused eventually fall into ruin over the years. Then again maybe the publicity will bring forward an alternative that can keep the ground as is?
Oh dear.... the knives are out for Sainsburys.
From reading the article it seems to me that the football club involved want to move and rebuild at another location. Whoever buys their old ground would be highly unlikely to keep it as is. So, sadly, the memorial will probably taken down anyway :-\
Campaigners insist the entire ground represents a war memorial and are furious that the gates are being dismantled
So says the Daily Mail - but why would anyone want an entire football ground to be left as a war memorial - unless they have plans and funds to refurbish it, upkeep it and allow the community to use it.
Or why don't they raise funds for Bristol Rovers to have the gates removed and installed at their new ground.
Other than that I think Sainsburys' statement -
We recognise that the site has historical importance which is why our plans preserve the memorial stone and also create a public square dedicated to the memory of former Bristol rugby players.'
- is hardly hypocritical and I hope they come good with that plan.
Again all this is my opinion, I know others may disagree.
Looby
-
As an ex-Bristolian I agree with you Loobylooayr!
The Memorial Stadium is going, whether Sainsbury's do it or somebody else does.
Bristol Football Club (the old rugby club) had a chance to save the gates & memorial.
Bristol Shoguns rugby club also had a chance.
Bristol Rovers could have had the gates & memorial moved to the new stadium site.
So why pick on Sainsbury's?!?! :-\ ::)
Another typical Daily Mail non-story!
Just reminds why I refuse to buy, or even read, the damned rag! ;D :-X
-
Another typical Daily Mail non-story!
Just reminds why I refuse to buy, or even read, the damned rag! ;D :-X
My apologies for posting a link to an article in the aforementioned "rag". I won't post any newspaper links in the future.
-
It does seem that Sainsburys sought advice and opinions before releasing the advert. The British Legion agreed with it and so did the Forces War Records Site according to their news letter:
"We were delighted that they asked for our opinion on the advert, and were very impressed at the detail and sensitivity they brought to the subject."
-
An endorsement from Forces War Records. Interesting.
Imber
-
Good evening,
Whether it's Sainsburys, government, church or any other group it's always the same. They are dammed if they do and dammed if they don't.
If the artists impression of the new ground is anything to go by then I would have thought the club could afford to move it themselves. What better than to call the new ground the "CENTENIAL MEMORIAL GROUND". As they are not doing either, one has to assume they don't actually care.
Sainsburys say they will use the stone and gates from the memorial. Why not move it complete, as it is , and put it in the new location. I'm sure they can find space and what better way to please the locals, who actually don't seem to have said much about it.
John915
-
A point of view from another country and nothing to do with supermarkets, advertising etc. The history that is shown in the clip is heart warming and a reminder to all.
The men on both sides stopped war for one day, as they all believed in one God and respected each others faith, no matter what government or political view they had, they upheld kindness to all humans in a time of war, which certainly is not showing in this day and age with global hatred and killings due to people not being of a certain faith.
So good on them for showing a brief glimpse of (not so correct history), but a compassion for us as humans in hardship and war one hundred years ago.
-
I am far away from Bristol but am able to comprehend that TRASH, who are the campaigners against a new supermarket of any name being built, have just jumped on this bandwagon.
I believe it was in 2012 that permission was given to Bristol Rovers to build a new stadium, which is when the above named group (T) sprung into action. They managed to delay the proposed start/completion dates - 2013/2104, by interfering and I imagine cost the club, who needed to sell the ground in order to create an up-to-date stadium, a great deal.
Yes I know they had a democratic right to do so, but they were against the creation of a new supermarket as TRADERS. Not once in all the reports I have read did they say it was because of the Memorial, until now!
Earlier this year they seemed to accept the fact that they had lost, but now (in my opinion only), they have seized on this opportunity to have a go.
Shame on them for manipulating/exploiting the current Ad for their own agenda.
Shame on the DM for using it in this way, but then they are in the business of trying to sell the publication in any way they can. Not to me though - ever.
I hope the Memorial finds a suitable location where more will see it, not only those attending a football match.
I'm still for the short film, and the main reason behind it. Good luck to the fundraising for The Royal British Legion.
Susan
-
I dislike sainsburys anyway...long story, fell out with them years ago lol...but as Christmas adverts go I think it's lovely and to be honest I didn't read too much into it other than its 100 years since the beginning of the Great War - and it's nearly Christmas.
Maybe I need to look deeper into things. But I certainly wasn't offended by it....I'm offended by them having christmas stock in the shops in September! X
-
I'm not offended. But equally, I'm not stupid. Ask yourself, what is the motive of Sainsbury's in showing that ad?
Corporate Social Responsibility is part of "Marketing", if you don't believe me, just go google.
-
As I read some years ago, when I was involved with ITC:
"Remember that television is an advertising medium NOT an entertainment medium" ;D
-
I'm not offended. But equally, I'm not stupid. Ask yourself, what is the motive of Sainsbury's in showing that ad?
Corporate Social Responsibility is part of "Marketing", if you don't believe me, just go google.
I think we realise that. We're not stupid either. Yes, they're "building their brand". We get it, but as "brand building" goes it has a lot of merit.
Imber
-
I'm not offended. But equally, I'm not stupid. Ask yourself, what is the motive of Sainsbury's in showing that ad?
Corporate Social Responsibility is part of "Marketing", if you don't believe me, just go google.
I think we realise that. We're not stupid either. Yes, they're "building their brand". We get it, but as "brand building" goes it has a lot of merit.
Imber
You said "we", can you clarify who all you were speaking for? Not all posters do agree that it is brand building, that is why I posted to express my opinion.