The American Apparel ad in the August 25 issue is way over the top. I guess it represents the values of the ownership of the paper, that is, "Anything goes if it brings in money." Disgusting and beyond good taste. Where in the paper going next? Full pornography?
Comments
Sex sells, and maybe keeps a few jobs with it. The Indy has emloyees to keep and bills to pay. I guess what we should be asking is how many people should they lay off so they can keep their advertising in "good taste". I may not agree with their editorial content, but they have a right and a responsibility to keep their enterprise economically sound, and if good taste has to suffer in that end, so be it.
jfklbj (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2011 at 7:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Good taste in responsible journalism should always triumph over profit margin -- I suggest the Indy get rid of the AmAp account and substitute a better retailer ad campaign.
grannyfranny73 (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2011 at 8:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I just love it when people tell a busines, "Just get rid of that advertiser." Oh sure! No problem! We'll just start telling the life's blood of our business to go take a hike! After all, there's plenty more fish in the sea who are willing to commit revenue to print advertising! Telling a periodical to get rid of an advertiser is like telling 711 to stop selling Slurpies. And, it's not like it was an ad for kitten stomping boots. I think it would also be prudent to take a look at 'The Independent's' main demographic before making an assessment as to whether it was a bad idea to run 'American Apparel's' ad. But, all that not withstanding; thanks Richard, for further bringing the offending ad to people's attention.
waz (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2011 at 8:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
And yes, all of you anti-capitalism liberals, 'The Independent' is a business. They don't rely on the mystical money tree to keep their operation going. They rely on generating revenue and, avert your gaze if you feel so compelled, profits. I'm sorry you had to see that, but it's true.
waz (anonymous profile)
August 31, 2011 at 8:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
This is rich. A comment chain, where the "conservatives" are aggrandizing money over conservative social values.
A perfect example of how the current crop of self-labeled "conservatives" are extremist, compared to *anyone else*--including any more moderate conservative. The farther to the right one goes, the farther to the left everyone else is. . . .
equus_posteriori (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2011 at 7:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
That makes about as much sense as anything else you've written; meaning none. As usual, you miss the point completely. It's not about conservatism versus liberalism. It's about good business practices versus unrealistic business practices.
waz (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2011 at 8:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)
In this case, I was commenting on the thread--it's pretty obvious, because my first sentence said "comment chain".
When considering capitalistic motives, it makes the most sense to keep advertisers, even--and especially--at the cost of possibly alienating a few with fine sensibilities.
My comment was to illustrate how knee-jerk reactions, like yours and that of 'jfklbj' are so ultra-"conservative", that you don't even realize that you've turned on your own tail. Talk about missing "the point". . . .
And. . .again. . .I feel that you have reading-comprehension issues. I take no responsibility for your inability to connect thoughts expressed with written words.
equus_posteriori (anonymous profile)
September 1, 2011 at 12:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
You've just got me so figured out! God! I wish everyone was as smart as you think you are!
waz (anonymous profile)
September 6, 2011 at 9:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)
@waz
Just for the record, I don't necessarily think that *I* am smart. However, that does not preclude me from thinking that you are not either.
equus_posteriori (anonymous profile)
September 7, 2011 at 2:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Wow! You really got me there!
waz (anonymous profile)
September 8, 2011 at 8:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
That's a shame, because I certainly don't want you. . . .
equus_posteriori (anonymous profile)
September 13, 2011 at 1:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Lame...
waz (anonymous profile)
September 15, 2011 at 11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I wanna be paid to bless or deny the future ads in the Indy.
John_Adams (anonymous profile)
September 15, 2011 at 5:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)