SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  What's Your Deal!    Lying (or "Disingenuous") On-Air Ads
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Lying (or "Disingenuous") On-Air Ads Login/Join 
Member
Picture of fpuhan
posted
Yes, we know that ads are often the most misleading of on-air announcements, especially these days when Diogenes would likely die a lonely man if he were looking at broadcast media.

But one particular ad really chafes my posterior. I won't give the product or service a public name, since I find its ads so disreputable that it amazes me they can continue to broadcast them. Let's simply refer to them as "ambulance chasers."

Attempting to scare the listeners, these foul miscreants say in passing, "according to the internal agency for cancer research..." Guess what? There IS NO such agency! There is an "InternaTIONAL Agency for Research on Cancer," and this is a not-so-clever way of tricking the audience into believing the "official sounding" nonsense being spewed by the announcer.

Taking advantage of cancer patients is one of the most foul preying tactics I can imagine. Every time I hear one of these ads I want to throw my radio across the room.




You can't truly call yourself "peaceful" unless you are capable of great violence. If you're not capable of great violence, you're not peaceful, you're harmless.

NRA Benefactor/Patriot Member
 
Posts: 1949 | Location: Peoples Republic of North Virginia | Registered: December 04, 2015Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
"If you are dead, you may be eligible for a substantial cash award"!


End of Earth: 2 Miles
Upper Peninsula: 4 Miles
 
Posts: 9467 | Location: Marquette MI | Registered: July 08, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Nullus Anxietas
Picture of ensigmatic
posted Hide Post
The FCC, or whomever was responsible for the decision, deciding to allow TV adverts for prescription drugs is matched in The Realm Of Bad Decisions only by the American Bar Association choosing to allow lawyers to advertise on TV. Ambulance chasers, the lot of them. One specific local one, who I'll not name, is particularly egregious, IMO.




"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system,,,, but too early to shoot the bastards." -- Claire Wolfe
The dominant media is no more "mainstream" than leftists are liberals.
 
Posts: 16575 | Location: S.E. Michigan | Registered: January 06, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Note that many of the ads state "I'm a non-attorney spokesperson". I presume that is an effort to get around state laws prohibiting advertising by attorneys. The drug company ads serve no purpose whatsoever, except to force already exorbitant drug prices even higher. They should have never been approved but in Washington, money talks and the drug companies have plenty of it to spread around.
 
Posts: 1932 | Location: Central Virginia | Registered: July 20, 2015Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Little ray
of sunshine
Picture of jhe888
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by ensigmatic:
The FCC, or whomever was responsible for the decision, deciding to allow TV adverts for prescription drugs is matched in The Realm Of Bad Decisions only by the American Bar Association choosing to allow lawyers to advertise on TV. Ambulance chasers, the lot of them. One specific local one, who I'll not name, is particularly egregious, IMO.


The ABA doesn't make that choice. It is local law, and the first amendment is implicated. We generally dissaprove of the government limiting speech.




The fish is mute, expressionless. The fish doesn't think because the fish knows everything.
 
Posts: 48335 | Location: Texas | Registered: February 10, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of fpuhan
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by jhe888:
The ABA doesn't make that choice. It is local law, and the first amendment is implicated. We generally dissaprove of the government limiting speech.


There are rules about false and/or misleading speech, however.

Flat-out making shit up in order to sucker a gullible public should have limits.




You can't truly call yourself "peaceful" unless you are capable of great violence. If you're not capable of great violence, you're not peaceful, you're harmless.

NRA Benefactor/Patriot Member
 
Posts: 1949 | Location: Peoples Republic of North Virginia | Registered: December 04, 2015Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Hucksters only lie because it works. If people were not stupid, they would not lie, or at least lie less, or tell better lies. It's funny how we all get exercised over 2nd amendment issues but want government agencies to control that which is offensive to us.
 
Posts: 15084 | Location: Lexington, KY | Registered: October 15, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of fpuhan
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Fredward:
Hucksters only lie because it works. If people were not stupid, they would not lie, or at least lie less, or tell better lies. It's funny how we all get exercised over 2nd amendment issues but want government agencies to control that which is offensive to us.


Yet, if I were to start a campaign refuting these ads, I'd be pulled into court in a heartbeat, being sued for slander or worse. Why are my First Amendment rights protected as well as the miscreant's?




You can't truly call yourself "peaceful" unless you are capable of great violence. If you're not capable of great violence, you're not peaceful, you're harmless.

NRA Benefactor/Patriot Member
 
Posts: 1949 | Location: Peoples Republic of North Virginia | Registered: December 04, 2015Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
IARC is a black box of agenda-driven scientists that churn out evaluations that pretty much state everything does, probably, or possibly causes cancer. Then the state of California rubber stamps it and lists it on Prop 65.
 
Posts: 2755 | Location: Alexandria, VA | Registered: March 07, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Let me know when they outlaw lying in TV ads. May come in handy during the next election.
 
Posts: 1932 | Location: Central Virginia | Registered: July 20, 2015Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I think it was 1972 or so when some lawyer sued the American Bar Association, before that lawyers and doctors were ethically not allowed to advertise ... period. That suit of course was a game changer....

I actually understand the logic of why lawyers and doctors should not have advertised.. the only reason you would go to one is to ask for their help and once you go to them there is 'logically' no guarantee they are going to be able to help you but you will still owe them for the effort....
 
Posts: 1076 | Location: Greenville, SC | Registered: January 30, 2017Reply With QuoteReport This Post
The success of a solution usually depends upon your point of view
posted Hide Post
There is a pair of ambulance chasers here who's tv ad talks about how far they went to investigate an accident and ends up with one of them saying "we won the case". During the ad a line of really small words flashes on the screen too quickly to read. If you rewind and pause it just right you can read it, it says "not an actual case".

I also hate the medical commercials that tell you how much better the medication will make your life but they don't tell you what it is supposed to treat, just "ask your doctor if xxxxx is right for you".



“Banning guns is like banning forks in an attempt to stop making people fat.” - Vince Vaughn

 
Posts: 3263 | Location: Jacksonville, FL | Registered: September 10, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Page late and a dollar short
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by ensigmatic:
The FCC, or whomever was responsible for the decision, deciding to allow TV adverts for prescription drugs is matched in The Realm Of Bad Decisions only by the American Bar Association choosing to allow lawyers to advertise on TV. Ambulance chasers, the lot of them. One specific local one, who I'll not name, is particularly egregious, IMO.


Only ONE around S/E Michigan? How about the billboards through Detroit? You know which attorney I'm referring to, right?


-------------------------------------——————
————————--Ignorance is a powerful tool if applied at the right time, even, usually, surpassing knowledge(E.J.Potter, A.K.A. The Michigan Madman)
 
Posts: 6031 | Location: Livingston County Michigan USA | Registered: August 11, 2002Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Back, and
to the left
Picture of 83v45magna
posted Hide Post
I love the one's that begin with a single word:

'ATTENTION!'

Those get me laughing right away.
 
Posts: 4996 | Location: Dallas | Registered: August 04, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Pyker
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by 83v45magna:
I love the one's that begin with a single word:

'ATTENTION!'

Those get me laughing right away.


'AAAAAAAAHTENshun!'

Me: 'Click'
 
Posts: 265 | Location: Minnesota | Registered: September 06, 2019Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Little ray
of sunshine
Picture of jhe888
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by fpuhan:
quote:
Originally posted by jhe888:
The ABA doesn't make that choice. It is local law, and the first amendment is implicated. We generally dissaprove of the government limiting speech.


There are rules about false and/or misleading speech, however.

Flat-out making shit up in order to sucker a gullible public should have limits.


What made-up shit have you heard in a lawyer's ad?

I can only tell you that the bar in Texas requires ads to be pre-screened (can you say 1st Amendment violation by prior restraint of speech?), and there is no way in hell they will approve any ad that contains lies, or anything that even gets close. They are well known for disapproving ads without explanation, or apparent logic.

You may find lawyer advertising to be distasteful, but it gets more scrutiny than most, if not all other ads. Only prescription medication advertising is as anywhere near as heavily regulated or screened.

And again, it is not the American Bar Association that regulates advertising, it is each state's Bar which is usually answerable to that states Supreme Court or some similar body.




The fish is mute, expressionless. The fish doesn't think because the fish knows everything.
 
Posts: 48335 | Location: Texas | Registered: February 10, 2004Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Striker in waiting
Picture of BurtonRW
posted Hide Post
We can advertise in Maryland, but we can't claim to be a specialist in a particular area of the law (compare/contrast with other states which actually certify attorneys in particular areas of practice). The best we can do is state that we handle certain kinds of cases in our advertisements.

That doesn't mean we don't have certain members of our bar who are notorious for their ads, however.

-Rob




I predict that there will be many suggestions and statements about the law made here, and some of them will be spectacularly wrong. - jhe888

A=A
 
Posts: 15230 | Location: Maryland, AA Co. | Registered: March 16, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata  
 

SIGforum.com    Main Page  Hop To Forum Categories  What's Your Deal!    Lying (or "Disingenuous") On-Air Ads

© SIGforum 2019