Aaku Posted January 26, 2012 Posted January 26, 2012 You go Hinduu !!! :clap: even we unsubscribed TOI se.. i read wonly epapers kaafi teym se now :((
Ram Posted January 26, 2012 Posted January 26, 2012 Ballsys ad from the Hindu. Why would they pick on Hrithik thought? :cantstop:
Yoda-esque Posted January 26, 2012 Posted January 26, 2012 Ballsys ad from the Hindu. Why would they pick on Hrithik thought? :cantstop: They didn't pick on him.They just needed a pop icon. They were actually picking on Gen-Z:winky:
Mariyam Posted January 26, 2012 Posted January 26, 2012 Nice thread this!!! Good points by DK, Pravin and Hari. Feels like college again :D For those fighting over whether a case can be filed or not' date='[b'] it wont go to a court of law, it will be heard by a panel from the regulatory board and the regulatory board understands subtle references and can rule on subtle references. In fact the board is made for that purpose - to keep a check on what extent advertisers go on direct as well as indirect references. Advertisements are usually more about subtle messages than about direct messages. It can go to a court of law. ToI can always say that section 36 a of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act ( sub : Unfair Trade Practices) is breached. 'unfair trade practice' means a trade practice which, for the purpose of promoting the sale, use or supply of any goods or for the provisions of any services, adopts any unfair method or unfair or deceptive practice including any of the following practices, namely...... relevant sub-clause gives false or misleading facts disparaging the goods, services or trade of another person. And there have been tons of cases where the brands at the wrong end of the comparative ads have knocked the doors of the courts - Neel vs Ujala, MRF vs Michelin India, New Pepsodent vs Colgate etc. for the breach of the above mentioned section. As Pravin has said, ToI hardly has any case though. ToI's depiction in the ad is hardly false :P or its portrayal disparaging (dictionary definition). Furthermore there is a provision under the MRTP Act, which creates a body called the Director General of Investigation and Research. They can, on their own , investigate a claim of restrictive or unfair trade practice. And they have done so many times. But no such instance where in they investigated a case of comparative ads comes to mind. However, since the ASCI is a self regulatory body, they can't investigate without any complaint from ToI. But that seems very unlikely because ToI doesn't have any case. PS: Am I the only one who likes the ToI? :((
hari504504 Posted January 26, 2012 Posted January 26, 2012 This is exactly what I am saying, not only is common knowledge a term used within the context of our discussion, it is also the last thing the defense would mention in a hypothetical case. That would be implicating themselves. I brought it up to highlight how the ad works, because that's what allows them to make it work without actually showing the newspaper or mentioning it by name. If you look at the Hindu Ad carefully you will find that they don't say anything about ToI either. The ad is completed in the audience's mind. This is what makes it work and this is why it passes the legal team's internal test - which is why it made it out in the public. It's called plausible deniability. This is also why no court will hear it. The Hindu will just say that this ad wasn't about the ToI at all. Imagine you were bringing this case on behalf of ToI. How will you prove that this ad was about your client? Again, the the hypothetical case, I do not see any prosecution, proving without doubt that non-deaf people can lipread. Beeping the word out protects the defendant completely. Plausible deniability didn't work very well in the "Complan Cup C , Horlicks Cup H" case did it ? ..according to your line of reasoning they could have simply said.."oh its just random letters assigned to the cups and thats that, we didn't intend for H to mean Horlicks and C to mean Complan". Court lets them go... but did it happen that way ? As for lip reading is only for deaf people, well I read a bit more on it, looks like only 25-30% of english words can be understood through lip movement alone.. yup so that does seem like a tough point to argue.
hari504504 Posted January 26, 2012 Posted January 26, 2012 Furthermore there is a provision under the MRTP Act, which creates a body called the Director General of Investigation and Research. They can, on their own , investigate a claim of restrictive or unfair trade practice. And they have done so many times. But no such instance where in they investigated a case of comparative ads comes to mind. Horlicks and Complan had yet another tussle in 2008 where someone apparently named the competitor outright and called them out on protein content..etc in an ad. Maybe that one did http://www.icmrindia.org/casestudies/catalogue/Marketing/MKTG209.htm Usually issues related to disparaging ads by rival companies were resolved by the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI). But with constant mudslinging at each other, the two companies decided to solve the issue in courts. In September 2008, Heinz moved the Bombay High Court objecting to the Horlicks ad , while in December 2008, GSK approached the Delhi High Court against the Complan ad. Experts felt that the latest tiff between GSK and Heinz had brought to the fore the issues and challenges involved in comparative advertising and the legal/ethical issues involved in such kind of advertising.
DomainK Posted January 26, 2012 Posted January 26, 2012 A very good reason for TOI not to complain is to restrict any further publicity of Hindu's ad itself. A case will mean publicity which will mean a wildfire coverage of what the Hindu's ad is and what it means. Either way TOI will lose.
Holysmoke Posted January 26, 2012 Posted January 26, 2012 I've stopped reading physical newspapers now. Read all the stuff online/ipad/phone.
DomainK Posted January 26, 2012 Posted January 26, 2012 Which news paper does this guy read (Watch the whole video. It's unbelievable). FS0MjTon_OM
akshayxyz Posted January 26, 2012 Posted January 26, 2012 I've stopped reading physical newspapers now. Read all the stuff online/ipad/phone. I stopped my subscription about 3.5 years back, July 2008 or so.
Prakat Posted January 26, 2012 Posted January 26, 2012 Plausible deniability didn't work very well in the "Complan Cup C , Horlicks Cup H" case did it ? ..according to your line of reasoning they could have simply said.."oh its just random letters assigned to the cups and thats that, we didn't intend for H to mean Horlicks and C to mean Complan". Court lets them go... but did it happen that way ? As for lip reading is only for deaf people, well I read a bit more on it, looks like only 25-30% of english words can be understood through lip movement alone.. yup so that does seem like a tough point to argue. Because it wouldn't have worked. They gave themselves away by opening putting C and H for no apparent other reason. The only part of the Hindu ad that comes close is the baseline: 'Stay ahead of the times.' But here's the out - It's a perfectly common phrase which can be used to sell a newspaper. ToI was beaten fair and square. And as the ones who drew first blood they should take it on the chin and move on.
akshayxyz Posted January 26, 2012 Posted January 26, 2012 Because it wouldn't have worked. They gave themselves away by opening putting C and H for no apparent other reason. The only part of the Hindu ad that comes close is the baseline: 'Stay ahead of the times.' But here's the out - It's a perfectly common phrase which can be used to sell a newspaper. ToI was beaten fair and square. And as the ones who drew first blood they should take it on the chin and move on. this.
Raghav_12 Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 I stopped my subscription about 3.5 years back' date=' July 2008 or so.[/quote'] I would never stop subscription of newspaper. Waking up in morning and opening door to see newspaper has been so integral part of my life for so many years. And yeah, if available, I always go for Hindu. But sadly they have only Delhi edition outside south India.
achilles Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 Court case written all over it !!... Btw, what prompted the ToI ad anyway ? .. 'The Hindu' is boring ???..since when is that.. The TOI ad was a dig at The Indian EXPRESS. Look, South is the only region where TOI doesn't do well. IE has a stronghold there. So to break that stronghold, TOI launched this campaign
hari504504 Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 The TOI ad was a dig at The Indian EXPRESS. Look, South is the only region where TOI doesn't do well. IE has a stronghold there. So to break that stronghold, TOI launched this campaign ah... :hmmm: interesting..
achilles Posted January 27, 2012 Posted January 27, 2012 ah... :hmmm: interesting.. Yes. They do worse than Manorama in South. So to break the strangehold of IE and to some extent the Hindu, they came up with that campaign. Hindu is probably the best newspaper in India. Their use of English is the best among all newspapers in the country. All they need to work on is being neutral. They're very biased and opinionated.
Recommended Posts