FLiCK OFF
 

The site.

The opposition.

The only part thats made it to the news...

Okay I realize I've painted myself as the tight-assed conservative a lot on this forum, but I think this takes the liberal-open-minded crap a bit too far. While watching TV with my 7-year-old nephew this afternoon, we got to see this lovely logo pop up on the screen and he proceeded to ask me what 'fuck off' meant.

Are environmentalist groups bad? No. Are the neccessary? Probably. Do they need to do it in an impolite and totally immature way? I don't think so.

In all honesty I don't see something like this even having to be an issue in the U.S. where even your most liberal stations wouldn't think off airing a logo like that (at least I don't think so), but here in Canada... yeah...

Its kind of sad to me really since conservation is such a noble cause but they have to ruin it with this attitude, and makes it nearly impossible to take them seriously. I'd make a bet that most of their support comes just from people who find the logo funny more so than caring about the environment.

Well its possible I'm missing something. But I dont think thats intentional. Sometimes you make things without realizing how it can be read. I mean pac-man was originally puck-man, but they realized what would happen if they did that. Only differance is these guys didn't catch it.

If I'm wrong and its intentional, well I found "I am sofa king" funny so I'm not the best to comment.

Oh, no no, look at the website. They've got buttons marked "GO FLICK YOURSELF" and "FLICKFEST". They knew what they were doing.

As for my thoughts on the campaign, I don't really see the point. It's all hype over substance, which doesn't sit well with me. Similar to the "Whudafxup" television and internet campaign put out by the anti-tobacco lobby here in the US.

I view it as desperate and condescending, personally. "It's been 30 years so far and people still don't give a crap about our cause! Clearly, we need some flashy new gimmick to say the same thing we've been saying the entire time. This time, however, I'm sure they'll listen because we've included a tongue-in-cheek reference to the word 'fuck'. The kids will eat it up, I guarantee!"

Pretty much my approach to this sort of thing is "Which is a bigger issue more worth getting offended about? Global warming and environmental degradation? Or some people whose logo looks kind-of like the eff word?"

I mean does conservation somehow stop being a noble cause because some people involved with it use the eff-word? I'm not really seeing it, but I guess I've always been a pretty eff-word-friendly kind of guy.

Much ado about nothing. Could've been classier about it, of course, but on the other hand, it's mildly clever and definitely memorable. Should we really be so concerned with the presentation as opposed to the actual message?

Also, I don't think the "check it out dude, it looks like it says fuck" attitude is markedly worse than the "OMG, they said the F word!" attitude.

Well, if anything, it's a counter-productive idea, as the suddenly the gimmick is distracting attention from the actual issue. Plus the fact that they most likely had to hire an advertising agency (i.e. bring in and spend money) to come up with some "hip" new way to tell people to turn their damn lights off when they leave a room is more than a bit ridiculous.

Honestly, if it's so important, film a commercial with a guy just saying, "Hey, turn your damn lights off when you leave a room. Seriously." Then you've saved money that clearly had to come from somewhere so that some business could make a profit off the whole endeavor, you get your message out, and you still get to curse on TV.

Conservation is still a noble cause, but its trying to promote respect for the environment in a disrespectful way... its unbelievable, immature, and hard to take seriously. Whats more it really DOES take the attention off what should be the main focus: the environment. They've essentially limited their target audience to people who are quite comfortable with the f-word, and made themselves 'inappropriate for all viewers'. I mean if they bump up the rating on a movie with this word in it, is it appropriate for day-time TV?

I really believe that they aren't doing themselves any good through this approach, since it is indeed immature. If they want to be taken seriously, they can't be trying to market it to people on the basis of "We're so hip, we almost said the F word on national TV."

As it stands, I don't think there's going to be much intersection between people who think nearly saying the F word is hilarious and people who think that the environment is worth saving. The main focus right now isn't their message, it's the fact that their sign kind of looks like fuck if someone's in the way. They would have been better off with POS' idea, since that would have had at least a chance of being seen as an actual message rather than a transparent attempt to convince rowdy teenagers that recycling is "the shit."

Pathetic.
 

When I opened this thread, I thought this was going to be one about opposition to MEGAFLICKs, whose logo suffers the very same problem (though possibly not intentionally).

I find that the reality is far dumber. Many people will be mortified or otherwise ignore it because of the "lol we almost gave you the f-word loooooooooool" approach, and as Khael said the only people who would stop to pay attention are the ones least likely to do anything about it in the first place.

If one isn't going to do some reasearch into something as fundamental as tact/good taste, then they might as well fLick off and find something slightly more productive to waste their time with.

Oh, do you see what I did there?