Got a blog tip? Contact us

« April 2007 | Main | June 2007 »

The Virgin that Wants You

So the other day Carrie sent me this link to an article in the Brooklyn-based blog Brownstoner (that was a fun alliteration) about these insipid new Virgin Mobile locally-targeted ads: If you click and read the copy, they're pretty awful, like some smarmy salesguy who Googled you. It's transparent and creepy. What the fuck does Virgin, a British company, really know about Bed-Stuy? Is Richard Branson out there most afternoons, getting his hair cornrowed on the stoop of his building?

But you can see why Virgin Mobile is wary of those "newcomers who want to change Bed-Stuy into some sort of yuppie strip-mall." Yeah, you tell 'em, Virgin Mobile.

Carrie asked if I'd seen these out here in LA, and my first thought was that those wouldn't really play in LA, where neighborhoods are less defined. But this morning I went out to check my mail and saw this sign in front of my driveway (click for a bigger image to read the text).

Looks like I was wrong. They are doing it here, but they're skipping the bullshit neighborhood parts and targeting specific homes. I have no idea how they got all this information. It feels pretty creepy. But how can I turn down a phone from a company so into me?

Green screens

While I'm psyched about all of the attention given to environmental issues lately it was only a matter of time before green product claims became self-parody. Witness the phenomenon, as reported in Rob Walker's Consumed column this week, of Credit Covers - decorative "skins" to personalize credit cards. A key selling point: the skins are "sweatshop free" and "carbon neutral."

Environmental claims are a dime a dozen but I'm hard-pressed to think of a more worthless product that uses them. Here's an environmentally friendly thought: don't wrap your credit cards in unnecessary packaging.  And to the guy who sells this crap: You want to be carbon neutral? Stop breathing.

A 1934 ad for "skinny" women to gain weight

It's hard to imagine a time when it was common for American women to try to put on weight. But thanks to this awesome 1934 ad we know it happened. Yep, body image here isn't all that much different than in Fiji—the transition just happened a lot earlier.

As a skinny person myself, I've always found it funny how 80- and 90-year old women will tell me how much weight I need to gain.... which, granted, may have as much to do about them being 90 and no longer bothering with social niceties as pre-television-era standards of beauty. But I remember meeting the 90-something friend of my man Charles's family for the first time. Upon being introduced, she told me I was too thin, then turned to Charles and said, incredulously, "You like her like that?!?"

(Via Boing Boing and Modern Mechanix)

New Zealand fights back against attractiveness

Pity poor Burger King. A distant number two to McDonald's, they try to close the gap with a little T&A and a bunch of New Zealand tightasses shut them down. It appears that the Kiwis don't allow advertising that uses "sex appeal simply to draw attention to a product." Apparently, some people in New Zealand have daughters or are women or something.

It is like a more feminist version of the British rule that prevents alcohol companies from implying that booze leads to sexual success, which I believe is known in the UK as the "No Truth in Advertising Law."

(Via Adfreak)

Sick of air sickness bags yet?

British Airways has taken US Airways ads on airsickness bags one step further. I found these ads as oversized airsickness bags on the Upper East Side the other day. "How did air travel become so bloody awful?" the bags ask the close observer.

Above them, the billboard reads "Party Like a Rockstar," and next to them (not pictured) is a sushi bar that's been shut down by the health department.

I give it two days before the bags start leaking.

Purely Coincidental

This cautionary film was made in the late 1970s for food manufacturers (human and pet). It lays on the heavy melodrama to make its point about the food safety. Guilt, assembly lines of food products and a dramatic soundtrack make this a favorite from the A/V Geeks archive.

Grand Fenwick Attacks!

Antigua has been fighting the U.S. before the WTO for years, arguing that American restrictions on internet gambling violate GATT. The U.S. has, essentially, told Antigua that if it wanted to change U.S. law, they might want to invest in a nuclear warhead to get us to care.

Well, it seems that the mouse has roared. Antigua has asked the WTO for permission to release it from its obligations to the U.S. under GATT. In other words, Antigua is about to stop respecting U.S. copyrights. That should get the U.S. to start paying attention.

I'm pretty sure that Jack Valenti rolled over in his grave when Antigua filed its request. And just when he finally found a comfortable position!

(Via Fark)

Spamtastic!

I'm no Spamusements, but I'd like to take a moment for more spam-based miscellany.

1) In the spirit of Toby the Rabbit, we were forwarded this email from reader Tosha:

>Hello my friend!
>
>I am ready to kill myself and eat my dog, if medicine prices [at an online pharmacy
>I have no intention of linking to] are bad.
>
>Look, the site and call me 1-800 if its wrong..
>
>My dog and I are still alive :)

I point out that "1-800" while kindly toll-free, is not actually a complete number. And that the website had a .hk domain; perhaps a joke about eating one's dog is not the best tactic.

2) I received an email with the subject "Best way to improve your credit score"; I didn't read it but I'll bet it said "Pay your bills, asshole."

American Woman

The caption next to this photo from The Sun was

MISS USA 2007 Rachel Smit parades [her nipple] during the Miss Universe's native dress fashion show in Mexico City.

I may have added the bracketed phrase.

In any event, America's native dress is apparently Vegas-tacky and really, really slutty. Well done, Miss USA!

NYT op-ed on Congestion Pricing

Sunday's New York Times had a couple of Op-Eds about Mayor Bloomberg's plan for congestion pricing in New York City. One of them, by Ellen F. Crain, makes almost no sense at all. Crain argues that congestion pricing will inadvertently lead to more traffic in the outer boroughs because "drivers will be looking for parking near subways there to take them to Midtown."

I'd love to ask Ms. Crain where all this presumably free and easy parking in Brooklyn is. I'm in Flatbush and even here free parking is slim pickins. The plumber across the street sometimes sits in his car for an hour just waiting for a space to open up. The idea that swarms of people rich enough to keep a car in the City would drive to another neighborhood, search for a space to park, then board the train for a 35-minute ride to the city just to save $4 (assuming the subway and back is $4) takes some imagination. I don't know about the other boroughs, but I'm going to guess that the closer one gets to the city and the subway, the harder it is to find free parking.

The entire Op-Ed rests on this claim, which is totally unsubstantiated in any way. It also doesn't acknowledge that there's a pretty easy workaround: get rid of free parking!