Television commercials/ if you blink you'll miss them

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

thanks

Postby professorpan » Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:13 pm

Thanks for pointing out the full context of my comment, Telexx. Taking one sentence out of context is a pretty lame way to indict me of "making trouble."

I don't just challenge other's assumptions, but my own as well. That's the way to avoid becoming trapped in one's own BS -- a serious trap when one sails in the deeper waters. If that's trouble-making, then trouble I will make.

I'll never apologize for trying to dig deeper and ask hard questions.
User avatar
professorpan
 
Posts: 3592
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 12:17 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Anyhoo

Postby professorpan » Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:32 pm

Back to the subject of subliminals....

As I said, I used to collect examples of print ads with subliminal content back in the 1980s. They were very prevalent then, especially in liquor ads (ice cubes were rife with images), cigarette ads, movie posters, and even ads for food.

After reading Wilson Bryan Key's books (Subliminal Seduction, Media Sexploitation, and The Clam Plate Orgy(!)) I opened a Rolling Stone magazine and started to look for them. The first one I found was a doozy -- the word "sex" in an illustrated ad for the film Raging Bull.

Most of the subliminal imagery was sexual (the word "sex" appeared everywhere), but the imagery in cigarette and alcohol ads was often death-themed. That's what I found most disturbing -- images of severed penises, the word "cancer," skulls, and so forth. The theory of many who studied the subject was that the dark imagery triggered unease and discomfort -- hence the need for a drink or a cigarette.

For the life of me, I can't find my folder stuffed with ads, but I did find a jpeg of the Raging Bull poster.

Here it is. See if you can see the word "sex."

I'll post the location in the next message.

Image
User avatar
professorpan
 
Posts: 3592
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 12:17 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby dbeach » Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:34 pm

"I'll never apologize for trying to dig deeper and ask hard questions."

dont want your apology
dont want your verbal abuse
or anything from you

your style remains unchanged ...insults ..vulgarities
silencing tactics on whatever topics you decide are too much for your global view

you roam free on this forum
with many targets


and think its funny cuz another poster leaves..

you dont like getting called on your own ..balloney

I prefer mine with mustard
dbeach
 
Posts: 2650
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2005 7:40 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Raging Sex

Postby professorpan » Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:39 pm

There are actually a few possible instances of "sex" in the hair, but one is so clear that once you see it, you can't stop seeing it.

That's always been my criteria for subliminals. Wilson Bryan Key should be credited for discovering the phenomenon and publicizing it, but when he started seeing "sex" in Ritz crackers, and even in draperies in his home, he fell victim to confirmation bias.

Here's the word outlined. After you see it, go back to the original and see how it pops out like a neon sign.

Image

And a closeup:

Image
User avatar
professorpan
 
Posts: 3592
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 12:17 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Telexx » Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:54 pm

That's pretty freaky...

You said this practice was more an 80s thing, not used so much now? I can't really get my head around it... I've worked in the "creative industries" (gah all dress down/shiny chrome interiors/show & tell meetings/trip-hop dinner parties bleugh) and the mind boggles to think at what point of the creative process did some bigwig say:

"Right so we're agreed on the blue mood boards. Excellent. Now, about the severed penises - We're thinking, oh I don't know, about 5 or 6? Assorted sizes? Perfect..."

FFS!

Telexx
User avatar
Telexx
 
Posts: 466
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2005 3:11 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Jezebelladonna » Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:01 pm

Man o man, are tensions high in here.

Admitedly, I sometimes cringe reading a debate between Pan and Hugh, but only because both sides are so fiercely unrelenting. But even Hugh has expressed on numerous tmes how much he appreciates Pan's challenges, Pan's lack of humor when dealing with Hugh notwithstanding.

Likely because Hugh knows that challenges to one's theories, in general, hones them, exposes weaknesses, strengthens the strong bits.

But vulgarity? Insults? Coincidently, the first poster to use vulgarity and insults was a poster responding to Pan in this thread (and continued the insults onto another poster). Not that there's anything wrong wth that, but it doesn't make for effective communication of the point if the point is Pan's lack of civility.
Jezebelladonna
 
Posts: 52
Joined: Mon Jul 17, 2006 8:05 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Me & Hugh

Postby professorpan » Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:11 pm

Admitedly, I sometimes cringe reading a debate between Pan and Hugh, but only because both sides are so fiercely unrelenting. But even Hugh has expressed on numerous tmes how much he appreciates Pan's challenges, Pan's lack of humor when dealing with Hugh notwithstanding.

Likely because Hugh knows that challenges to one's theories, in general, hones them, exposes weaknesses, strengthens the strong bits.


I have stated multiple times that I appreciate Hugh's creativity and his intellect. I do try to argue about ideas and not personalities, though I have slipped a couple of times. And I have apologized to Hugh as well.

I still think his examples of keyword hijacking are batshit. But that doesn't mean I harbor any animosity towards him as a human being.
User avatar
professorpan
 
Posts: 3592
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 12:17 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Not quite subliminal

Postby professorpan » Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:18 pm

Image
User avatar
professorpan
 
Posts: 3592
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 12:17 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Excellent article on subliminal advertising

Postby professorpan » Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:23 pm

This article is too long to post here, but it's a comprehensive look at the subject:

http://www.stayfreemagazine.org/archive ... ising.html

Highly recommended if you're into this kind of thing.
User avatar
professorpan
 
Posts: 3592
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 12:17 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Another

Postby professorpan » Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:34 pm

User avatar
professorpan
 
Posts: 3592
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 12:17 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: true story

Postby yesferatu » Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:42 pm

professorpan wrote:
Imagine you're sitting in front of the TV, watching Dr Who in 1987, when this happens:


I was in my late teens, and watching an episode of Larry King's show on TV. He was discussing the death of a young boy who had been beaten to death with a baseball bat by some other kids. (Sorry, but I'm fuzzy on the details).

All of a sudden, another image bled through the interview as the mother was describing her grief at the loss of her son -- the image, in sickly green, of someone swinging a baseball bat!

It really freaked me out, to the point where I made some phone calls (this was pre-Internet). CNN's lines were jammed for hours.

I read in the newspaper the next day, or shortly thereafter, that it was a technical glitch -- signal from a baseball game bled-through into the Larry King interview.

It was an extremely bizarre and unsettling synchronicity.


Anyone remember this:
<<Remember, Remember the 22nd of November
Posted by Alan Bellows on January 9th, 2007 at 9:33 am
Max Headroom Pirate Impostor
On 22 November 1987, sports anchor Dan Roan of Chicago's WGN-TV News Network was narrating the video of the day's football highlights when something highly unusual happened. The pictures on the station monitors in the studio suddenly began to jitter and twitch. Across Chicago, countless other televisions did the same, as Dan's clips of the Bears game were lost in a brief flurry of static and replaced with the sinister, grinning visage of Max Headroom. Most viewers were familiar with the techno-stuttering character from the recently canceled television program bearing his name, and from advertisements for the New Coke soft drink. But there was something unsettling and surreal about this rubber-masked imposter.

As a low buzzing sound belched from thousands of televisions throughout Chicago, the intruder's image swayed and wiggled in front of a slowly rotating background. Half a minute later, as suddenly as it had appeared, the strange scene was gone. As Chicago's televisions reverted back to the world of the ordinary, the visibly flustered sports reporter reappeared, and commented, "Well, if you're wondering what happened… so am I."

WGN-TV's on-site technicians neutralized the "pirate" transmission by switching to an alternate transmitter, but the attacker's motives and methods were a mystery. It was not the first time a commercial television broadcast had been commandeered, but very few prior attempts had been successful. The previous year a satellite dish salesman going by the fanciful pseudonym "Captain Midnight" had succeeded in briefly replacing HBO's signal with a complaint about their prices, and earlier in 1987 an employee of the Christian Broadcasting Network had hijacked the Playboy Channel's signal. Both of these prior offenders had clear motives, and the authorities had successfully located and prosecuted the troublemakers. But this new instance of signal hacking was much more perplexing.
In spite of the quick actions of WGN-TV engineers, Chicago had not yet seen the last of of this new signal-plundering pirate. Almost exactly two hours after the first unplanned detour from normality, at 11:15pm, viewers of the PBS affiliate WTTW were absorbing an episode of the British sci-fi series Doctor Who when their TV pictures danced sporadically for a moment. With a randomly gyrating panel of corrugated metal used as a backdrop, the unnerving Max Headroom doppelganger launched into an eccentric diatribe in a highly distorted voice. With no engineers on location at the transmission tower, WTTW employees looked on helplessly as the intruder seized control of their broadcast to say the following:
"He's a freaky nerd!"

"This guy's better than Chuck Swirsky." (a WGN -TV sportscaster at the time)

"Oh Jesus!"

"Catch the wave." (a reference to the New Coke marketing slogan)

"Your love is fading."

(hums the theme song to the 1959 TV series "Clutch Cargo")

"I stole CBS."

(unintelligible)

"Oh, I just made a giant masterpiece printed all over the greatest world newspaper nerds."

"My brother is wearing the other one."

"It's dirty."

"They're coming to get me!"

This symphony of strangeness reached its crescendo when the rubber-masked imposter dropped his trousers, exposed his backside, and weathered a spirited flyswatter spanking from a female assistant. Moments later the picture went dark, and the surreal signal terminated in a flash of static. Viewers were dumped back into the pedestrian world of Doctor Who as though the bizarre buttocks-swatting incident had never happened. Many were confused and troubled by the display. The following day a number of viewers contacted the station to lodge their complaints regarding the "nudity." In a television interview, one flustered Doctor Who fan summed up his reaction: "I got so upset that I wanted to bust the TV set… I really did."

The Federal Communications Commission and the FBI sprang into action, launching independent pirate-hunting squads to unmask the disturbing messenger. It was clear that the fellow had a rare knack for electronics and microwave equipment. WTTW's uplink antenna was atop the 1,454 foot Sears tower in downtown Chicago, and investigators concluded that the "signal pirate" smothered the legitimate broadcast by sending a more powerful signal to this antenna. According to some experts in broadcasting, a rig of sufficient power could be purchased for about $25,000– or perhaps rented for a few thousand dollars– and the disassembled equipment could be transported using a few large suitcases. Agents believed that the perpetrator either beamed his message from the rooftop of an adjacent building, or that he somehow gained access to a powerful ground-based transmitter. But Max had covered his tracks well, there was no clear indication of how he had executed his sophisticated attack.

His motive was even more puzzling than his methods. The enigmatic message may have been due to a grudge against WGN-TV, since the station's call letters stand for "World's Greatest Newspaper," and he makes a reference to "greatest world newspaper nerds"; and he also mentions Chuck Swirsky, another WGN sports reporter at the time. But given the resources and risks involved in commandeering a commercial signal, the message seems disproportionate. At that time, the law allowed for a maximum penalty of $100,000 and one year in prison for such signal piracy. Perhaps the intrusion was merely a proof-of-concept– a precursor of future ambitions– or perhaps there is more meaning to the message than what is immediately evident. The Max Headroom television show had been set in a post-apocalyptic future where evil television corporations controlled the world, and freedom fighters spread their messages by zipping their pirate signal into live television feeds, and this subtle social commentary was not lost on investigators.

Whatever the impostor's intentions, he certainly took significant risks to bring his nebulous message to the televisions of Chicago. The exhaustive investigations by the three-letter agencies turned up nothing substantial, and over time the FCC and FBI resigned their manhunts without any significant insight into who he was, how he did it, or why. To this day the unexplained transmission of 22 November 1987 remains an historic curiosity, since it represents the last such signal of its kind… no other instance of a complete hijacking of a commercial broadcast has occurred in the US in the twenty years since. For now the mysterious masked Max Headroom lookalike remains at large, but his backside may never truly be safe from the mighty flyswatter of justice.>>

http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=776
yesferatu
 

Postby Joe Hillshoist » Wed Jan 10, 2007 2:22 am

pan there was a spin off from Murphy Brown back in the early 90s.

Once watching one some people in the room went out for a feed.

While they were gone I noticed one of the characters wearing a brooch that looked like a pack of macas fries.

they came back with chips (no Macas nearby) saying they had this urge to get chips.

I made a bet they would after they left (thats when I noticed the brooch).

Won a beer woo hoo. i posted that story somewhere recently. Thought it was this thread....

BTW You do get a hard time on this site, possibly one thats not deserved. But anyway...

In and amongst the noise, some interesting signal in this thread...

1- WombaticusR:

Quote:
[commercials are] actually most effective when you ignore them, apparently. The data is pretty consistent on that.


I remember reading this some years ago in a tabloid newspaper, and then thinking: Evil fuckers! They're just saying this to make us pay more attention...

Later, I came to realise that adverts written using hypnotic language will be much, much more effective if you tranced out when they came on. Do you have any data?


This is very true, I used to watch ads more carefully than the shows, out of the corner of my eye very carefully, like a dangerous animal.
Joe Hillshoist
 
Posts: 10616
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

good god

Postby Nordic » Wed Jan 10, 2007 4:32 am

Can you guys have a thread anymore without it turning into an endless snipe-fest?

Seriously, this board has gotten way out of control. I used to really enjoy coming here, and now it's almost impossible to wade through all the bullshit arguing and insulting and fighting.

It's really getting ridiculous.

It's turning into a real waste of time to come here and try to read anything.
Nordic
 
Posts: 14230
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:36 am
Location: California USA
Blog: View Blog (6)

Postby orz » Wed Jan 10, 2007 7:52 am

Anyone remember this:

I posted youtube link earlier in the thread:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnDYssFcNxc

Crazy stuff! 8)

Shame it's not easy/possible to hack into TV signals these days... :twisted:
orz
 
Posts: 4107
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 9:25 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Sexploitation

Postby John E. Nemo » Wed Jan 10, 2007 3:31 pm

Nordic wrote:Can you guys have a thread anymore without it turning into an endless snipe-fest?

Seriously, this board has gotten way out of control. I used to really enjoy coming here, and now it's almost impossible to wade through all the bullshit arguing and insulting and fighting.

It's really getting ridiculous.

It's turning into a real waste of time to come here and try to read anything.


Point taken.

I want to first thank dbeach and NavnDansk for their pointed observations of Pan's behavior, which mirror my own.

While I'm in the praising mood, let me also say that dbeach's posts in threads have been so excellent that I often don't bother to post.
dbeach says in 10 words what I would have babbled about for half a page.
Good on ya and keep on keepin' on. (You too NavnDansk).

I am extending the olive branch to professor pan, as he posted the exact info that I was going to about Media Sexploitation.
This is very helpful,
so I will attempt to overlook any slights in the future and call a truce.

Here's another example of "Sexploitation" that I found some time ago.
Image
John E. Nemo
 

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests