Are there some "hot button" topics that are sure to send any thread into a deadfall? November 7, 2002 9:10 AM   Subscribe

I recently posted a thread about a nike shoe ad that I found interesting, and it did not go over well. How does one post a thread about an ad that you would like to show for the ad's sake, not the product? how do you assure the community that you are not part of some viral ad campaign?

Are there some "hot button" topics that are sure to send any thread into a deadfall?
posted by quibx to Etiquette/Policy at 9:10 AM (24 comments total)

Poetry and song lyrics are right out.
posted by yhbc at 9:11 AM on November 7, 2002


I guess you might preface your post with "The product is crap, but the ad is kind of neat..." But I personally will skip it anyway; I use the blab-off on TV ads, and I'm not about to go out of my way to look at one here.
posted by languagehat at 9:36 AM on November 7, 2002


how do you assure the community that you are not part of some viral ad campaign?

Don't be a part of the ad campaign by posting it.

Further, the 'Well, the Mac Switch ads are always posted" line is such a thin attempt at debate. The switch ads, while advertising, and following the similar viral paths, are at least real people, however coerced. These people made a choice, and are telling you why they did. Seeing the product at face value.

Also, because one is in the advertising industry and lauds an advertisement as something of value, unto itself, is not enough, as these persons tend to be a bitch of Madison Avenue outright.

Lastly, to believe one's life is more complete within the spacious walls of consumerism is fine for the individual. However, be insightful enough to know not everyone's life is manufactured.
posted by four panels at 9:36 AM on November 7, 2002


Honestly, I would perhaps go to a discussion forum specifically about media, advertising, or the product itself. There, you'd be able to discuss the advertisement openly. I don't know how it's possible to talk about an ad like the Nike one (that displays the product prominently) without drawing attention to the item for sale.

The threads I like the most link to something provocative, or thoughtful. I did see your thread yesterday, and—this is not to be unkind—thought, "A new Nike shoe. What's so interesting about that?" I mean, really, what can you say about it besides "cool" or "Nike makes millions off the labor of Indonesians"? It's bound to spark discussion, sure, but about things unrelated to the link.



posted by acornface at 9:37 AM on November 7, 2002


I use the blab-off on TV ads, and I'm not about to go out of my way to look at one here.

Hallelujah, brother

posted by matteo at 10:08 AM on November 7, 2002


"and it did not go over well."

I suspect the problem was the post rather than the link. "Where can I get a shoe like this?" is just asking for a thread that will wander all over the place.

Some people might have been interested in this. But why? For the design of the site? Becuase the shoe is cool? Nike is a corporate thug?

Being vague is asking for trouble in many cases.

That's just my guess though.
posted by y6y6y6 at 10:25 AM on November 7, 2002


Drawing more attention to the dying thread (as well as the advertisment) here on the metatalk is ingenious, I must say. You have to tell us how much the ad people are paying you.
posted by crunchland at 11:29 AM on November 7, 2002


I think y6 is onto the heart of the problems. There could be plenty of reasons you would want to broach the topic, the site design, the shoe design, media culture, material culture, etc. but you didn't quite sell the post like that, it seemed more of a post to sell a shoe, not to some unique and fascinating link that we all would find cool and wouldn't have found on our own from a million other sources (ie banners on websites)
posted by Pollomacho at 11:30 AM on November 7, 2002


The switch ads, while advertising, and following the similar viral paths, are at least real people, however coerced. These people made a choice, and are telling you why they did. Seeing the product at face value.

LOL. Are you saying you couldn't find people to say something positive about nike sneakers, or any other product? The switch ad is just better viral advertising (helped by apple's zealous and loyal fan club), not any more real.

In any case, I think y6 and pollomacho pretty much covered the problems with the post -- it just wasn't much more that a link to an ad.
posted by malphigian at 12:04 PM on November 7, 2002


It was a poor post. You linked to an advertising site, which is of marginal interest to most people, then instead of salvaging the post by asking a pertinent question (Are Transformers a new ad meme? Is Nike off the mark? How relevant are marquee shoes today?), you left it wide open with a "these are so cool!" statement phrased in the form of a question.

Posts about advertising campaigns are fine, in my opinion, so long as there's something to discuss. And it's up to the poster to help guide that discussion.
posted by me3dia at 12:07 PM on November 7, 2002


I don't think there was anything wrong with the content. But knowing some MeFi readers, it probably should have been worded differently, in a way that made it clear that it was an advertisement and that the advertisement/design was cool because X.
posted by Kevs at 2:31 PM on November 7, 2002


How does one post a thread about an ad that you would like to show
you don't. this is a savvy and deep-surfing crowd. if it's an ad, we've already seen it. twice.
posted by quonsar at 4:22 PM on November 7, 2002


/s seen ignored
posted by quonsar at 4:23 PM on November 7, 2002


it's an ad, we've already seen it. twice.

This morning.
posted by dg at 4:38 PM on November 7, 2002


The switch ads, while advertising, and following the similar viral paths, are at least real people, however coerced. These people made a choice, and are telling you why they did. Seeing the product at face value.

Are you retarded, or do you think we are?

My God! Have you watched one? Have you ever seen a commercial? Those aren't real people, man. I could make more real people with an ice pick and a hammer. You need to go back to school.

Seriously, I find that offensive. Do you think mimes are real people? If a mime sells Nike shoes, is he still a real person? No. Mimes just suck. If a mime sells Nike shoes, he sucks even worse.
posted by son_of_minya at 12:45 AM on November 8, 2002


quibx, as people here have said, some links can stand on their own, while others need context. With some thought, a link such as this can lead in many different directions. For example:

Nike evidently claims about 70% of the money spent on shoes by boys between 13 and 18, which accounts for such products as the new Nike-Lego Bionicle shoe and makes one wonder if this Transformers theme is a brilliant fusion of literal "boy-toy" and The Guardian's advice to Nike for appealing to the less-active 30+ bunch: "Just Watch It". Then there's the possibility of exploring the forms that advertising is taking in order to attract the crotchety internet crowd (some examples here). Art and shoewear is another possibility (here and here, for example). And of course Nike's history of marketing yields tons of interesting tidbits, such as the Nike "poetry slam" and the fact that Nike was the origin of what this article believes is the ritualization, even deification, of sport corporate logos... And there's more.

My advice on links like this one is to let your own curiosity be your guide; if you are intrigued by something, find out more.
posted by taz at 12:49 AM on November 8, 2002


If a mime sells Nike shoes, he sucks even worse.

You have to understand, it's kind of difficult to sell shoes, being trapped in an invisible box and all.
posted by Stan Chin at 12:53 AM on November 8, 2002


some links can stand on their own, while others need context. With some thought, a link such as this can lead in many different directions

Conversely, you can't polish a turd.
posted by walrus at 2:12 AM on November 8, 2002


I personally come here to *avoid* any ad-related news.
posted by dabitch at 5:22 AM on November 8, 2002


Well apparently I have to give more thought into the subject and wording of the post. Hey, it was my second post, so I guess this is all a learning experience. Sorry you all had to be the guinea pigs.

And crunchland, I wish I made what a nike marketing person made. I posted this thread to get constructive criticism so that I would be able to post FPP's that appeal to the MeFi crowd.

They can't all be winners, right?

Thanks for all the input.
posted by quibx at 6:21 AM on November 8, 2002


I posted this thread to get constructive criticism so that I would be able to post FPP's that appeal to the MeFi crowd.

When you figure it out, let me know.
posted by crunchland at 6:42 AM on November 8, 2002


"I personally come here to *avoid* any ad-related news."

And if the post is tailored well enough you won't have to read it this time either. No body forces anyone to read andy of the links here. You see one that talks about an ad, be it for Nike shoes, Apple computers or Microsoft Products (which I might add got a much nicer reception than this Nike thing despite being a blatant ad), just don't click it!
posted by Pollomacho at 9:01 AM on November 8, 2002


What abou the latest google ad/feature we get every week? We see those all the time. Is it that it's not wrong to advertise a site, but it's wrong to advertise the advertising for a site? Would that go on metametafilter?
posted by blue_beetle at 10:52 AM on November 8, 2002


blue_beetle: MetaFilter was originally a techie site, basically. Though it has greatly changed since, reports on techie things like Macs and Google are still viewed with much more tolerance than those on, say, shoes. (Personally, I skip 'em all; just 'splaining.)
posted by languagehat at 11:59 AM on November 8, 2002


« Older poemfilter   |   Can we stop pointing out spelling errors? Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments