This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← The Gruen Transfer - The Pitch: Banning All Religion

The Gruen Transfer - The Pitch: Banning All Religion - Comments

achromat666's Avatar Comment 1 by achromat666

I don't think a ban on religion is going to be realistic solutions for large parts of the world where it is still very much part of the infrastructure of the social and political landscape. An overall necessity over time? Can't see it as a solution as enforcing something like that would be an uphill battle at the least and an infringement on individual rights (realizing the irony that many of the religious insists on infringing on our rights daily) which we as atheists are defending to have our views heard.

The fact, however that it is coming up on a TV show and addressed in such a way is promising, as the taboo of the subject is no longer as great as it was many years ago.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 14:50:18 UTC | #868260

jel's Avatar Comment 2 by jel

Interesting that only 2 ad agencies were even willing to come up with possible campaigns and that the rest of the agencies wouldn't even consider it.

I don't think you can ban religion anyway, even though I dislike it and don't believe in any of them, that smacks a little bit too much of censorship to me.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 15:01:06 UTC | #868264

Richie P's Avatar Comment 3 by Richie P

I really, really want them to show that on American TV... Oh well, one can always dream.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 15:03:43 UTC | #868267

Michael Fisher's Avatar Comment 4 by Michael Fisher

I like option two best ~ just so long as cricket is only optional

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 15:08:33 UTC | #868272

Aztek's Avatar Comment 5 by Aztek

Personally, I liked the first one more. It was more entertaining, and it clearly presented actual bad ideas. The second one felt a little forced, like it tried too hard to play the emotion card.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 15:13:27 UTC | #868277

LaurieB's Avatar Comment 6 by LaurieB

These two ads work well together. I'd love to seen them alternate in air time during the nightly national news here in the States. It would be a welcome break from the usual appeals from the pharmacy companies promoting erection pills and Alzheimer meds. I can't imagine the funding that would be required for this even if it would be accepted by the frightened networks.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 15:20:13 UTC | #868281

hemidemisemigod's Avatar Comment 7 by hemidemisemigod

I liked the first one better. I thought the tag line: "Let's make religion history" was rather clever.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 15:49:25 UTC | #868293

Jay G's Avatar Comment 8 by Jay G

I didn't know one could play cricket on sand.

I agree that this would be great to see on American TV, but I don't think we are ready for it quite yet.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 16:08:57 UTC | #868298

alaskansee's Avatar Comment 9 by alaskansee

@1 & 2 It was just a thought exercise no one is actually going to try but what an awesome idea for a show and what an excellent exercise.

Australia seems like such a sensible place with real open conversation or "freedom of speech" on it's TV and radio. I've heard lots of good stuff recently, go Aussies.

First they came for Scientology then they came for...

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 16:13:03 UTC | #868300

dandelion fluff's Avatar Comment 10 by dandelion fluff

Put it in the context of "should we rethink religion" instead of "should we ban religion", and these would be wonderful to play on American TV, especially as various religious denominations are already showing their sickly-sweet ads.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 16:34:07 UTC | #868305

Quantum Zombie's Avatar Comment 11 by Quantum Zombie

Somebody just needs to call Fox News. I'm sure that'll get these ads shown in the US.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 16:39:53 UTC | #868307

KenChimp's Avatar Comment 12 by KenChimp

Comment 8 by Jay G :

I didn't know one could play cricket on sand.

I agree that this would be great to see on American TV, but I don't think we are ready for it quite yet.

I think the US is past ready for this.

In a nation where "The (Useless) Response" and "Pray the Gay Away" clinics can spark a lot of controversy (and much needed conversation), ads such as these two on consigning religion to the scrap-heap of history are wanted and needed.

But then again, Xianity is "under attack" innit? Those godless, evil unbelievers are prosecuting (persecuting?) a war against religious beliefs, particularly the beliefs of organized religious institutions.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 17:10:56 UTC | #868318

AtheistEgbert's Avatar Comment 13 by AtheistEgbert

Ban? Who gets to ban? Such fascist thinking.

I would happily see the back of religion, but through reason not force.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 17:30:19 UTC | #868323

Jos Gibbons's Avatar Comment 14 by Jos Gibbons

Neither advertisement calls for banning religion, but rather for abandonment of religious ideas. The distinction is quite important. I have every right to condemn the ideas of others, but not to "ban" them (what does that even mean? To punish those who hold them?)

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 17:32:02 UTC | #868324

AtheistEgbert's Avatar Comment 15 by AtheistEgbert

Jos Gibbons,

The presenter introduces the item by saying it is a campaign to 'ban all religion'. Even the title of the youtube video says 'banning'. One of the speakers in the campaign says outrightly that the campaign is to ban religion. Feel free to listen to the video again.

The distinction is very important, and that is why the piece is outrightly wrong.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 18:12:47 UTC | #868333

monkey's uncle's Avatar Comment 16 by monkey's uncle

Comment 13 by AtheistEgbert :

Ban? Who gets to ban? Such fascist thinking.

I would happily see the back of religion, but through reason not force.

I agree (although I accept that the proposal was not a serious one). The only way to win is to win the argument. This is happening albeit far too slowly for my liking.

At the age of 10 I believed that I could look forward to all religious belief dying off within my lifetime. I'm now in my fifties & I'm rather more pessimistic about that prospect.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 18:17:22 UTC | #868336

jel's Avatar Comment 17 by jel

@ alaskansee I didn't think it was for real, just a panel game on a tv show but it's still worrying (to me at least) that they couldn't get all their normal panel to try out for the slot. I think that shows that religion still has a hard grip on so many people.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 18:22:01 UTC | #868337

achromat666's Avatar Comment 18 by achromat666

@alaskansee, agreed it wasn't to be taken seriously, but as a subject it's something I felt a real response to was necessary, if for nothing else to outline the general issues common to both sides (as far as the basic rights are concerned). It's going to be a combination of discourse and science I suspect to finally either put it to rest, or retreat it to a position of little to no impact on any aspect of society as a whole. And obviously that will take a while yet.

But as I said, to have this on TV anywhere is promising even as just a hypothetical question.....

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 18:35:03 UTC | #868341

AtheistEgbert's Avatar Comment 19 by AtheistEgbert

Comment 16 by monkey's uncle

This is happening albeit far too slowly for my liking.

Yes indeed, it is slow, because reason is not working on the unreasonable.

We should worry less about convincing unreasonable people with reason, and concentrate on the politically organized fundamentalists, evangelicals and conservatives who want to bring about a tyranny. They are the ones who bring about the propaganda campaigns attacking science, education and the free minds of those who exist in free societies.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 18:37:01 UTC | #868343

drumdaddy's Avatar Comment 20 by drumdaddy

Bravo!

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 19:43:24 UTC | #868354

jackashflash's Avatar Comment 21 by jackashflash

If Australia bans religion, I am moving there. It would not even have to be a ban on religion, just stop trying to convert people, especially their children.

Personally, I like the 1st one, but I believe the 2nd one would be more influential.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 20:04:16 UTC | #868363

Neodarwinian's Avatar Comment 22 by Neodarwinian

Of course we can not ban religion, but we can make the popes head explode with these ads!

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 20:09:37 UTC | #868364

dloubet's Avatar Comment 23 by dloubet

The first one was less of a call to ban religion, and more a call to just drop it with an awesome slogan. The second one was more of a call to ban religion, and therefore less palatable to me. I don't want to ban it, I just want it out of the way.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 20:39:08 UTC | #868371

Mr DArcy's Avatar Comment 24 by Mr DArcy

No doubt Jesus has some influence over the sponsors. It's ok to sponsor euthenasia for the over 80s, but not to sponsor to ban all religion. Of course any such ban would be meaningless, as history has shown repeatedly. And who is going to enforce any such ban, - the Spanish Inquisition?

No doubt religion will tread its weary and foggy way into the history books as human knowledge improves, and yes, that includes Islam!

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 20:59:51 UTC | #868373

MekoninBrisbane's Avatar Comment 25 by MekoninBrisbane

To give this some context guys, The Gruen Transfer is a TV show about advertising. Each episode two agencies are given an impossible sell, kill everyone over 80, bring back child labour, invade New Zealand, that sort of thing. The agencies change every week as do the challenges. Those agencies that refused to play the game missed out on the only chance an agency gets to nationally advertise themselves. Amazing. Versions of the holy game of cricket can be played everywhere. I have played at the beach, in offices and warehouses, in back yards and even on designated cricket pitches! To assuage your heresy please turn toward the Gabba and bow.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 22:03:35 UTC | #868379

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 26 by mordacious1

Someone should produce something similar to these and request that they be aired during the Super Bowl in the U.S. They won't be shown of course, but the publicity would be pretty good. Lot's of publicity for the "banned" message, totally cost free.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 22:04:18 UTC | #868380

Reckless Monkey's Avatar Comment 27 by Reckless Monkey

The Gruen transfer is a show about advertising (an excellent one) It discusses advertising strategies, how they get people to buy things, so the show, shows advertising and the panel (heads of leading advertising agencies, and creative directors) then explain what is behind the methods etc. As a media teacher I'd love to show it to my year 9 class but language and concepts are a bit blue sometimes. It's information but with a comedy twist (the host Will Anderson is an Australian stand up comedian). Every week they give a challenge to advertisers to sell an impossible to sell product. In the past they have had lowering the drinking age to 15, mandatory Euthanasia for anyone over 80, polygamy and many others, this is the first one in 3 seasons that they have agencies refuse to participate (that tells you something about the hold of religions special status in our society). But no, unfortunately Australia isn't trying to ban religion. While many Australians consider themselves to be fairly irreligious, we did give the world Ken Ham.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 22:14:58 UTC | #868382

Feuerbach's Avatar Comment 28 by Feuerbach

Reckless Monkey

K.Ham is an Aussie (dare I say "live") export, but he had to go to the USA to be taken, erm seriously.

It is fucking remarkable the extent to which people undergo self-censorship when it comes to religion.

I say to those ad agencies who copped out: YOU'RE FUCKING SOFT.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 22:20:42 UTC | #868384

Reckless Monkey's Avatar Comment 29 by Reckless Monkey

Comment 17 by jel

@ alaskansee I didn't think it was for real, just a panel game on a tv show but it's still worrying (to me at least) that they couldn't get all their normal panel to try out for the slot. I think that shows that religion still has a hard grip on so many people.

It was their normal panel (the people judging the ads), they ask real advertising agencies (different ones each week) to make ads for different outrageous ideas (the unsellable pitch), it's promotion for the agencies, this was the first time some of the agencies they asked wouldn't do it. But your point is well made.

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 22:26:52 UTC | #868386

QuestioningKat's Avatar Comment 30 by QuestioningKat

Comment 10 by dandelion fluff :

Put it in the context of "should we rethink religion" instead of "should we ban religion", and these would be wonderful to play on American TV, especially as various religious denominations are already showing their sickly-sweet ads.

I say keep them as is. Watering it down to rethink religion just opens the door to point fingers at someone else's religion. Looking at the social changes that have happened over by half century of living, it seems as if someone needs to come out and really shock everyone. What happens as a result is that more safer views are then more easily accepted. Maybe they should appear as pop-up windows or ads before utube videos. I've noticed that many of the atheist videos I watch on utube have ads for Christian singles...Why not turn the tables?

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 22:33:44 UTC | #868388